Josh Smith Daniel Nusbaum The Waiter

Joshua Smith (who refers to himself as a Conservative Lawyer – a total Fraud, he has absolutely no Conservative Values) was employed as a waiter at Monterey Bay Fish Grotto in Pittsburgh, Pa from 2005 to 2007 (I guess he couldn’t find a job as a lawyer despite his prestigious Cornell resume)

In July, 2007, he sued them because he was prescribed speed (he found a doctor to prescribe it citing ADHD and Manic Depressive).  He informed the restaurant he was disabled (wow, sorry to all the people who are REALLY disabled) and he had to have more meal breaks than usual.

Instead of going to trial, the restaurant decided to settle out of court and paid him 35,000.

He didn’t claim it as income. (Hmmm, I guess as a lawyer and Constitutional Scholar this does not speak well to him. Either he knew it and refused to report it (criminal) -or he didn’t know, which goes to show he is incompetent.

And the IRS then sued him.

dan nus myspace

Josh Smith/ Daniel Nusbaum old My Space picture 


Here is the link to the document (but I copied and pasted below in case you’d like to read for yourself).

And this

Mr. Smith was formerly employed as a server with MBFGMTW Limited Partnership d.b.a. Monterey Bay Fish Grotto (“MBFG”) from approximately June 30, 2005, until MBFG terminated his employment on January 30, 2007. While he was employed by MBFG, Mr. Smith was diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (“ADHD”) and major depressive disorder (“MDD”). Both ADHD and MDD are disabilities within the definition of “disability” in the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (“ADA”), Pub. L. No. 101-336, 104 Stat. 327. As part of his treatment regimen he was prescribed a stimulant medication called Desoxyn (methamphetamine hydrochloride). One of Desoxyn’s side effects (The burden of proof is generally on the taxpayer, see Rule 142(a), and the 2 submission of a case under Rule 122 does not alter that burden, see Borchers v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 82, 91 (1990), aff’d, 943 F.2d 22 (8th Cir. 1991); Rule 122(b). The stipulated record consists of: the facts alleged in Mr. Smith’s petition 3 filed with this Court on October 5, 2012, to the extent they are admitted in respondent’s answer filed on November 30, 2012; the stipulation of facts; and the exhibits attached thereto. – 4 )– is appetite suppression. This was problematic for Mr. Smith, who is small in stature. He is only five feet six inches tall, and his weight fluctuated between 120 and 140 pounds before he began taking the medication. Mr. Smith’s primary care physician was concerned about the appetite suppressive effects of Desoxyn on his general physical and mental health, particularly if he lost any weight. As a result, the physician recommended that he consume as many calories as possible whenever he was able to do so. MBFG’s employee meal policy This medical advice conflicted with MBFG’s longstanding policy prohibiting servers from eating during a shift. The only exception that MBFG allowed to the policy was that a food server could eat if less than 30 minutes remained before the restaurant stopped seating guests, and if that server had no guests remaining at his or her assigned tables. First and second violations of the policy resulted in written warnings, while a third violation resulted in termination of the server’s employment. Mr. Smith recognized the tension between his physician’s recommended eating regime and MBFG’s restrictive meal policy. He informed MBFG of his disability and requested to be excepted from the policy. For a brief period, MBFG – 5 – initially excepted Mr. Smith from the policy and he was permitted to eat without restrictions as his appetite demanded. However, management’s patience with Mr. Smith’s accommodation quickly waned, and on January 30, 2006, Mr. Smith was informed that MBFG would no longer accommodate his disability and that he was again subject to the meal policy. At that meeting MBFG explained the terms of the meal policy to Mr. Smith as follows: Mr. Smith was permitted to take up to two eight-minute breaks per shift, but only after first receiving permission from the manager; Mr. Smith was permitted to eat only pre-prepared food that was bought outside the restaurant; and Mr. Smith was permitted to consume his food only while standing in a particular location in the kitchen, in full view of all kitchen employees. Less than two weeks later, Mr. Smith was called to a meeting with MBFG management and disciplined for violating the meal policy. He was told that he would be terminated if he violated the meal policy again. Administrative complaint and District Court lawsuit Mr. Smith submitted a questionnaire to the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission (“PHRC”) on February 16, 2006, alleging that MBFG had engaged in discriminatory conduct. The following day Mr. Smith notified MBFG in writing of his decision to pursue formal charges of discrimination as a result of its meal – 6 – policy, retaliatory conduct, and refusal to accommodate his disability. On July 21, 2006, the PHRC dismissed Mr. Smith’s complaint because the complaint did not establish probable cause to show discrimination. MBFG terminated Mr. Smith on January 30, 2007. In response to his termination, Mr. Smith filed on July 24, 2007, a civil lawsuit against MBFG in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, Civil No. 07-01032, pursuant to the ADA and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, 43 Pa. Cons. Stat. secs. 951-963 (West 2009). In the lawsuit Mr. Smith alleged that MBFG discriminated and retaliated against him because of his disability. Mr. Smith alleged that he suffered emotional distress, anxiety, depression and other consequential damages. Mr. Smith’s amended complaint filed November 19, 2007, stated: “As a direct and proximate result of defendant’s actions toward Plaintiff, as described herein, Plaintiff has suffered, and will continue to suffer, severe emotional distress, anxiety, depression and other consequential damages.” Settlement of the discrimination claims In March 2010 Mr. Smith and MBFG executed a “Confidential Settlement Agreement and General Release”. The settlement agreement described Mr. Smith’s claims as follows: – 7 – [Mr. Smith] * * * does hereby fully and forever release, discharge and hold harmless MBFG * * * from any and all liability upon claims, causes of action or obligations of every nature whatsoever, whether known or unknown, arising out of or relating to his employment and termination from employment or to any other act, event, failure to act or thing which has occurred or was created at any time before the date on which this Agreement is signed. Without limiting the generality hereof, this release covers claims or causes of action based upon torts (such as, for example, negligence, fraud, defamation, wrongful discharge); express and implied contracts; federal, state or local statutes and ordinances, including those which regulate employment practices (such as, for example, The Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, The American [sic] with Disabilities Act, Title VII of the Civil Rights of 1964, the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act); and every other source of legal rights and obligations whatsoever. This description includes no specific mention of physical injury or sickness. In this settlement agreement, MBFG agreed to pay $35,000 in exchange for Mr. Smith’s release and discharge of any claims or causes of action he had against MBFG. Mr. Smith and MBFG’s agreement allocated the settlement payment as follows: Plaintiff has requested, and the parties have agreed, that Five Thousand Dollars of the total payment be allocated to lost wages. MBFG shall report this portion of the payment to the Internal Revenue Service through an IRS Form W-2 and such payment shall be subject to applicable employment tax withholdings. Plaintiff has requested, and the parties have agreed, that the remainder of the sum be allocated to pain and suffering, emotional distress and the expense of suit. This portion shall be reported to the Internal Revenue Service through an IRS Form 1099. [Emphasis added.] – 8 – The settlement agreement also provided that Mr. Smith was “solely responsible for the tax liabilities due from him, if any, which result from his receipt of money under this Agreement”. MBFG issued Mr. Smith a Form 1099-MISC, “Miscellaneous Income”, and reported the $30,000 of nonemployee compensation paid to him during tax year 2010. Mr. Smith did not report the $30,000 of nonemployee compensation on his 2010 Federal income tax return. On July 2, 2012, the IRS mailed Mr. Smith the notice of deficiency, which determined a deficiency in tax of $7,705, and on October 5, 2012, Mr. Smith filed his petition in this Court. On April 7, 2014, the parties filed their stipulation of facts and jointly moved to submit the case under Rule 122. By order dated April 7, 2014, the Court ordered the parties to submit simultaneous memoranda briefs by July 7, 2014. Mr. Smith did not file a brief, but we construe his position to be that the unreported income is excludable from his gross income pursuant to section 104(a)(2) because it was allocated to pain and suffering. Respondent’s brief argues that the unreported income represents settlement proceeds that were not received on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness and therefore are not excludable from gross income under section 104(a)(2). – 9 – Discussion As a general rule, the IRS’s determinations are presumed correct, and the taxpayer has the burden of establishing that the determinations in the notice of deficiency are erroneous. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering, 290 U.S. 111, 115 (1933). Mr. Smith has not contended that the burden of proof has shifted pursuant to section 7491(a), and the record shows no basis for such a contention. The record shows that Mr. Smith did receive the unreported income; thus, the presumption of correctness attaches in this unreported income case. See, e.g., Harris v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2012-333. I. Taxability of settlement awards Section 61(a) provides the following broad definition of the term “gross income”: “Except as otherwise provided in this subtitle, gross income means all income from whatever source derived”. Section 61(a) is thus broad in its scope, and exclusions from gross income must be narrowly construed. Commissioner v. Schleier, 515 U.S. 323, 328 (1995). Section 104(a) provides that gross income does not include: (2) the amount of any damages (other than punitive damages) received (whether by suit or agreement and whether as lump sums or as periodic payments) on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness * * *. – 10 – * * * * * * * For purposes of paragraph (2), emotional distress shall not be treated as a physical injury or physical sickness. The preceding sentence shall not apply to an amount of damages not in excess of the amount paid for medical care (described in subparagraph (A) or (B) of section 213(d)(1)) attributable to emotional distress. The legislative history shows that “[i]t is intended that the term emotional distress includes symptoms (e.g., insomnia, headaches, stomach disorders) which may result from such emotional distress”. H.R. Conf. Rept. No. 104-737, at 301 n.56 (1996), 1996-3 C.B. 741, 1041. Therefore, to be excludable from gross income under section 104(a)(2), a settlement award must be paid to a taxpayer on account of physical injuries or physical sickness, which does not include emotional distress or symptoms thereof. Where damages are received pursuant to a settlement agreement like Mr. Smith’s, the nature of the claim that was the actual basis for settlement controls whether those damages are excludable under section 104(a)(2). United States v. Burke, 504 U.S. 229, 237 (1992). Whether the settlement payment is excludable from gross income under section 104(a)(2) depends on the nature and the character of the claims asserted in the lawsuit. See Bent v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 236, 244 (1986), aff’d, 835 F.2d 67 (3d Cir. 1987); Church v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. 1104, 1106-1107 (1983); Glynn v. Commissioner, 76 T.C. – 11 – 116, 119 (1981), aff’d without published opinion, 676 F.2d 682 (1st Cir. 1982). The determination of the underlying nature of the claim is factual. Robinson v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 116, 126 (1994), aff’d in part, rev’d in part, and remanded on another issue, 70 F.3d 34 (5th Cir. 1995); Seay v. Commissioner, 58 T.C. 32, 37 (1972). Where there is a settlement agreement, the determination of the nature of the claim is usually made by reference to the agreement. See Knuckles v. Commissioner, 349 F.2d 610, 613 (10th Cir. 1965), aff’g T.C. Memo. 1964-33; Robinson v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. at 126. If the settlement agreement lacks an express statement of the claims that payment was to settle, the intent of the payor (here, MBFG) is critical to that determination. Knuckles v. Commissioner, 349 F.2d at 613; see also Agar v. Commissioner, 290 F.2d 283, 284 (2d Cir. 1961), aff’g per curiam T.C. Memo. 1960-21. II. The nature of Mr. Smith’s claim against MBFG We surmise from Mr. Smith’s petition that his position is that the unreported income is excludable from his income under section 104(a)(2) because it was partially allocated as damages for pain and suffering under the settlement agreement. (He makes no contention that the amounts were for medical care. Cf. sec. 104(a) (flush language).) Because the unreported income arose from Mr. – 12 – Smith’s settlement agreement with MBFG, we must first look to the settlement agreement to determine the nature of the claims it was intended to settle. The settlement payment is excludable from gross income only if it was paid on account of physical injuries or physical sickness. Alternatively, if the settlement payment was paid on account of general pain and suffering or emotional distress, then it would not be excludable from gross income under section 104(a)(2). As we have noted, the settlement agreement does not specifically mention any claims for physical injuries or physical sickness. And by its terms (quoted above), the settlement agreement does not provide that any portion of the payment was allocable to claims for physical injuries or physical sickness. Rather, it allocates the payment to “lost wages”, “pain and suffering, emotional distress and the expense of suit.” This Court has noted, however, that “‘pain and suffering’ is a broad term that includes emotional distress and its symptoms”. See Longoria v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-162. Settlement payments for non-physical injuries such as emotional distress are not excludable from income under section 104(a)(2). See id.; Hawkins v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-286, aff’d, 386 Fed. Appx. 697 (9th Cir. 2010); see also Blackwood v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2012-190 (holding that depression is a non-physical injury under section 104(a)). – 13 – When we look to Mr. Smith’s Federal court complaint to see whether it states more particular claims (i.e., physical injuries or physical sickness) that would justify exclusion, see Burke, 504 U.S. at 237; Church v. Commissioner, 80 T.C. at 1106-1107, we find it does not. The claims Mr. Smith asserted against MBFG were for discrimination and retaliation; and the damages Mr. Smith claimed were: “severe emotional distress, anxiety, depression and other consequential damages”. These injuries are non-physical. As we have previously held, section 104(a)(2) and the flush language of section 104(a) require that, to be excluded from income, any damages must arise from personal injuries or personal sickness other than emotional distress or the symptoms thereof. See Longoria v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2009-162. Thus, we cannot hold that Mr. Smith’s claims for damages were for physical injuries that might give rise to a settlement award that is excludable from income pursuant to section 104(a)(2). The character of the settlement payment hinges ultimately on the dominant reason of the payor in making the payment. See Agar v. Commissioner, 290 F.2d at 284; Fono v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 680, 696 (1982), aff’d without published opinion, 749 F.2d 37 (9th Cir. 1984). Mr. Smith has not met his burden to establish that he received the $35,000 settlement payment, or any identifiable part thereof, from MBFG on account of personal physical injuries or physical sickness. – 14 – For that reason we find that the $30,000 of unreported income is not excludable from Mr. Smith’s gross income under section 104(a)(2) for his tax year 2010. To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered under Rule 155.


Joshua Smith is a Lawyer? Say What?


I read an interesting story about Twitter banning a “Conservative Lawyer” named Josh Smith on

Josh Smith

Josh Smith or Dan Nusbaum? 

Ironically, right after that, Mr. Smith joined “WeSearch” – a research group put together by Chuck C Johnson and Pax.

Josh Smith “Cornell” graduate seemed extremely full of himself. He really, really, seemed to dislike women. He always refers to people he didn’t like as retarded, autistic, having ADHD, etc.

He is obsessed with the young women who recently came forward to accuse frat boys of raping them.

He wanted to place a bounty on the victim of the Stanford rape so he could shame her publicly.

He constantly talked about his youtube videos and how brilliant they were.

They are literally the most boring videos I’ve ever seen.

I’ve taken clips of the one defending Brock Turner (his video was almost three hours long, but not to worry, I’ve shortened it to only a few minutes. Pay attention to the part where he thinks the victim should be grateful Brock raped her outside the dumpster, and not IN the dumpster!)

I found it very, very, difficult to believe he was a lawyer.

From his Google + Profile he wrote about his “My Guidelines About Following (Circling) Others

Generally speaking, if you circle me, I will circle you back within a reasonable time.  I will not circle you back, however, for any one (or more) of the following reasons:

  1. You do not have a profile image. 

Cover images are nice, of course, and indicate that you are serious about Google+, but I do not view a cover image as a requirement.  At a bare minimum, however, you must have a profile image.

  1. Your profile contains “indicia of shadiness.” 

By this, I mean that your profile meets certain criteria which would tend to indicate that you are not who you claim to be, that you are not serious about using Google+, or that your intentions for using Google+ are, in any way, not “above board” (e.g., spam distribution, criminal activity).”

I found this interesting, as when doing research, a paper he cited as having authored while at Cornell was actually listed under a different name:

The Craziest Reform of Them All: A Critical Analysis – Scholarship ……

Legal Information Institute

by DJ Nusbaum – ‎2002 – ‎Cited by 26 – ‎Related articles

inclusion in Cornell Law Review by an authorized administrator of … Daniel J. Nusbaum, The Craziest Reform of Them All: A Critical Analysis of the …

There is a Daniel Nusbaum who sued his employer:

High nor low, I could not find any evidence of a Joshua Smith as attending Cornell.

So, is “Joshua Smith” assuming the identity of Daniel Nusbaum (but remember, Josh does not approve of anyone acting “shady” – so I doubt this could possibly be him!) Or is Joshua Smith actually Daniel Nusbaum?

Either way – Joshua Smith who is now back on Twitter as SallyKohnFans

displays his vulgar hatred toward women (and anyone who doesn’t agree with him) in such a way that I have to wonder if he might be mentally ill.

One thing is sure, he has been on many “conservative” shows, has been written about in Breitbart (for having his Twitter account suspended) and if no one checked on his story that he was a lawyer, then shame on them. Just looking at his “law” website that looks as if it were designed by a 7th grader is enough to raise red flags.

I am not a fan of political correctness, but this Josh Smith uses the excuse of “war on white men” to screech like a hamster with its head stuck in a spinning wheel. There are true “freedom warriors” – and they understand what is decent.

Joshua “I went to Cornell” Smith is not to ever be mistaken with a Conservative or even an ALTright.

And if he is a ‘lawyer’ – for all the time he spends Tweeting, making Youtube videos, and on Slack’s WeSearch – he obviously has no work. Shocking, I know. He goes on and on and on about how how wonderful he is and how much more smarter he is than anyone else. Lawyers don’t do this. They know how to use language to persuade without attacking. Or at least to hide their attack under glittering language.

Joshua Smith? I think he’s delusional. But let him prove it to you: He refers to himself as H.E. Pennypacker (a character Kramer played in Seinfeld) Here he is suggesting there be a bounty (pay people to find information) on the Victim of the Stanford Rape.

Lindy West: WOEman

The following is a review of the book SHRILL by Lindy West (a WOEman). She is a perfect example of someone who believes MOXIE WON’T. Someone who uses excuses and makes a living being a victim. She is a divider, not a unit-er.

Lindy West is a Seattle-based writer, editor, and performer whose work focuses on pop culture, social justice, humor, and body image. She’s currently a culture writer for GQ magazine and and a weekly columnist at The Guardian, as well as the founder and editor of I Believe You | It’s Not Your Fault, an advice blog for teens. In 2015 she wrote and recorded a story for This American Life about confronting an Internet troll who impersonated her dead father. She also was listed as “Internet’s Most Fascinating of 2015” by, and helped launch the viral #ShoutYourAbortion hashtag in defense of women’s reproductive rights.


Lindy West SHRILL

“Three aspects of the self betrayer’s conduct always go together: accusing others, excusing oneself, and displaying oneself as a victim.”


Oh Lindy Lindy Lindy.

This book is so…sad.

Lindy admits she was raised in a wealthy home with a progressive mother. I can somewhat identify, though my family didn’t talk politics, my mom was a product of the feminist movement.

However, like Lindy, my mom was torn between two worlds.

Wanting to be loved and hold on to traditions of romance – and yet wanting to be independent.

I also, in a way, am like Lindy in that I was highly influenced by pop culture. I thought “progress” meant sexual freedom and gratification and putting pleasure on the top of the “To Do” List.

As I grew older, I realized that not only is pleasure fleeting, it’s disabling and dis-empowering. It corrupts our spirit and soul – which then leads to what Lindy is experiencing: a very troubled angry person who lashes out and throws everyone under the bus (with the pretense that “it’s for their own good”).

Don’t get me wrong – what is the point of being an author if not being authentic. I 100% believe that it’s great to name names and shame people who have mistreated people.

HOWEVER, the theme in Lindy’s book is ANTI-SHAMING people! She feels she’s been bullied, but then turns around and does the exact thing she claims to be a victim of.

This book is not funny.

It’s not empowering.

LIndy claims to be self-confident; her writing speaks to something different: she has no confidence and so she clings to a movement that does nothing but confuse and divide its members.

Of note on being part of the Twitter panel that “seeks to provide a safe place from bullying.”

I read Shrill just as Azealia Banks went on a Twitter rampage against Sarah Palin; calling for Palin to be gang raped by black men and assorted other horrible tweets.

Banks was not muted, nor was she kicked off Twitter.

However, Twitter (thanks to the feminist “safety council” in which Lindy is a part of) has been responsible for shadow banning many prominent conservatives who have never said anything as hateful nor violent as Banks.

Chuck C Johnson, Robert Stacy McCain, Milo Y, etc.

The thought of “silencing” any speech no doubt has Ray Bradbury and George Orwell turning in their graves. The party of “progression” is now regressing to the era of book banning.

And if Lindy truly cared about bullying and shaming, well then, she’d stand for ALL women and not just select women.

By the end of the book, I found myself feeling sorry for Lindy. She is confused and being exploited by a group of people who seek power and gain by promoting victimization, by dividing us, and distracting us.

The book is hypocritical, lacks integrity and authenticity. It’s hard to believe she is a champion for women when she only comes to the defense of a certain few.

Freedom of speech is the most powerful weapon we, as a society have. Those that control speech control power. The more a society is secure, the more those who want to rule need to divide, decay, district, in order to ‘save.’ And the first thing they target is speech and status. Those that advocate collective rule are distrustful that man is capable of making his own choices.

I’m Dying (Again)

I am certain that I’m going to die soon.
I have to have surgery to remove my meniscus.
Now, listen, to any other person, surgery like this is not a big deal.
But I am not like any other person.
I am overly dramatic.
I also have a cardiac history which I was assured was “nothing” only to discover upon waking up after surgery to have my breasts enlarged (by far the most ridiculous thing I’ve done) that I went into bigeminy and trigemniy while under anesthesia. I also have a tendency to turn anemic, and I have low blood pressure.
So now, anytime I have to have anesthesia, I freak out. I still have my wisdom teeth and was advised to have them removed. But they aren’t causing problems, so I don’t want to take the chance of going under.
I was supposed to have a colonoscopy. Nope. It’s not going to happen. I’m never going to do it. Not unless I’m in so much pain that the fear of being in constant pain lessens the fear of dying on the table. Case in point: I had a complete hysterectomy. I took the chance of dying on the table rather than living with the debilitating symptoms.
Now, the interesting thing is: prior to my hysterectomy, I was sick for almost a year. My blood work correlated to the fact that something was causing my extreme fatigue. I couldn’t take a shower without getting out of breath. Could barely walk the dogs without wheezing. After testing, bumping up my iron, things improved. But in the meantime, the tests had revealed a lesion on my liver, a large diverticulum on my duodenum (I still really do not understand what that means but my GI guy said stop worrying about it, so finally, I did), and a cyst on my ovary that never went away and others that had bled and left scars.
I really became convinced I was dying. And with that in mind, I started to question my life choices. I’d read a series of books that had provided many brilliant insights to how my life might have been more…successful. Might have saved me from a whole hell of a lot of embarrassing choices and mistakes that had been chronic. Would have made me a better parent. A better person.
So I threw a book together as fast as I could and called it “Something that Will Change Your Life.” I took a pen name: Moxie Will (because listen, if people can self-identify as different RACES, surely, I can choose a different name).
I’ve always loved the name Moxie, and believed it fit my personality: quirky, colorful, strives to be courageous. And Will: because I truly believe self-determination is the key to happiness. We makes the human race unique is that we are born with the ability to control our own thoughts, our own attitude. But we’ve been conditioned to believe that we are not capable of making our own good choices. That we are damaged and hardwired to fail; we aren’t really responsible for our actions –we’ll be doomed no matter what we choose, so why not choose pleasure as often as possible!
But as I honestly reviewed my life and my choices, I realized my thoughts had been highly influenced by society: Madonna’s “Like A Virgin” video was released when I was 16 years old. And the articles I read in Teen magazines had less to do with respecting your body by NOT having sex and focused more on “the right of young women to choose to HAVE sex.”
But mostly, it was the books I’d read and movies I’d watched: everything had to do with love. Love was the thing that made the world go around. Finding a person to love you was finding someone who would provide you with a soft landing when the sea of life got too rough.
My parents had been a product of their upbringing and the generation that always sided with adults and placed little value on their kids feelings.
Being the curious and outspoken kid I was growing up; I was often in trouble for question authority (I know, can you believe it?). My parents almost always sided with the ‘grownups.’ – so I was eager to find someone to stick up for me, fight for me – someone like the love interest in almost all the books I read and the movies and TV shows I watched.
Obviously, I didn’t die. I ended up having a hysterectomy and came through with flying colors.
Only now that I was better, the immediacy of getting the lessons I’d learned (so that hopefully, others might make less mistakes and have more satisfaction and happiness in their lives) was not so immediate.
And then my fear of looking stupider than I usually do – which could possibly cause my husband to divorce me (which, would then take away my medical insurance!) – which could alienate my children (who are already embarrassed by ¾ of what I do and say), fear and self-preservation wormed it’s way into mindset.
Also, I was no longer the fun girl. I cared more about striving to be good; to be better, than to be out drinking, partying, shopping, being entertained. To me, learning WAS fun. (Oh my god, maybe I have brain cancer). I focused on history and little known books from the 1950’s and 60’s.
I had all these IDEAS. I have binders full of notes. Full of highlights. Full of writing. Yet, I was too afraid to put anything out there.
I don’t really fit anywhere.
I’m not religious, though I very much respect and admire those who practice.
I’m spiritual in a naturey sort of way.
I’m more Conservative in my values. I believe in tradition. Yet, I’m still, under it all, a rebel who questions the status quo. I’m a huge believer in personal freedom. It shouldn’t be about anyone controlling anyone – it should be about teaching people the value of character and courage and common sense, so that when they are faced with temptations of temporary escape and excessive pleasure; they are aware of the long term consequences to their spirit, their character, and ultimately, their happiness.
When I didn’t die from a mystery disease, when I didn’t die from surgery, a part of my rebel spirit did die.
When I had convinced myself I might be , probably was, dying, I felt free to be myself – to continue to rebel!
When I woke up after surgery (and it takes a-while to heal from a hysterectomy) I was very aware of my mortality.
When I was young and a rebel; it didn’t worry me too much; I still had plenty of time to find a partner and/or become so successful I wouldn’t have to worry about where I’d live and how I’d survive.
Then I started to notice the crows feet, my body started complaining, and I had not become wildly successful.
I did/do have a partner, however. He was/is getting a bit tired of my creativity AND his buying the groceries. I had my own money, but it was not very much. Okay, it’s actually so little that I have stopped even going to consignment shops, coloring my hair, and avoid any celebration that requires giving gifts (which, let’s be honest, the whole gift thing is WAY OUT OF HAND, even people who can easily afford giving gifts agree with me). He has been hoping his support will pay off. I think he’s starting to have more hope in winning the lottery.
The bad news is: I need to have surgery.
The good news is: I again, believe I’m going to die during the operation; it gives me an excuse to worry less about making a fool out of myself, and concentrate more on helping people realize what the difference is between a significant life and a superior life, and what long held beliefs and influences are holding them back from true happiness.
The bad news is: I have no plan of implementation. I am not totally focused. I absolutely know I’m going to embarrass myself (that’s good entertainment for you though, right!).
And if I DO die, well hell, hopefully my message will reach many more people much faster and I’ll save the world after all! Or at least the part that isn’t 100% committed to the Kardashians.

So stay tuned. Though I don’t have a concrete plan, I DO intend to blog every day until the surgery. To share things I’ve experienced. I plan on writing about Tinder. Sex. (Okay, I guess they are the same thing). All the Liberal Things I’ve Done. Hypocrite City. How Forgiveness is Mostly Bullshit. Why we should stop celebrating everything. And much more…

And if I don’t die; then at least I will be farther than I would have been by keeping everything bottled up until I was able to formulate the “perfect” plan. I will know that, once again, I’m facing life in my quirky, somewhat courageous way, and if my husband divorces me, at least I’ll have two good knees to continue dancing through life. In consignment store (but fabulous!) shoes, of course.

Something Wishful This Way Comes…

Something Wishful This Way Comes…

Would you live your life differently if you knew that one day your deepest desire would be fulfilled?

Hollywood A-List actress Moxie Bleu is wildly successful but lonely. On the eve of her latest movie premiere, Moxie discovers she’s been drugged and deceived. When a wizened old woman stops to help, Moxie finds herself confessing she feels like a fraud, undeserving of her fortune and fame. The woman offers a solution to Moxie’s unhappiness and with one wish, everything changes.

1958 homemaker Sadie Cooper is the envy of every woman in the cozy town of Honey Hollow, Pennsylvania. Married to charming Jack Cooper, the mother of two darling daughters, Sadie is well loved by family and friends. Lately, though, Sadie finds she is distracted and a bit resentful that she gave up a career in theater to get married and raise a family. One evening in July, Sadie’s sister, Kitty, talks her into visiting the old antique shop: May Contain Magic. The shop is rumored to be run by a family of sisters that have ties to Salem. Sadie soon discovers the meaning behind the name of the shop: May Contain Magic.

The next morning, Sadie and Moxie wake to find they have switched lives.

Sadie must navigate through the technological advances of the 21st century and Moxie’s professional career –which is in shambles.

And Moxie finds it difficult to live in a world not constantly connected by the internet or cell phone – and that being an actress is a piece of cake compared to being a mother and wife.

Diary of Movie Star Moxie Bleu is a story about wishes coming true, the magic of friendship and family, filled with humor and includes a recipe for cookies that will surely bring a little bit of magic into every readers’ life.

Available on BN.COM for Nook 2.99

Available on Amazon Kindle 2.99

Dr. Neftali Ortiz Reportedly Left Scene Of Accident

Dr. Neftali Ortiz – left scene of accident

On 2/4/2016 – Holly Madden, four months pregnant, was driving her truck when she was hit from behind.  She got out to get insurance information from the driver that hit her. He refused to talk to her. She called the police and took pictures of him, the damage to her car, and his car and license plate. He not only refused to give her any information, but according to Ms. Madden, he hit her truck again and left the scene.

She was able to find out who the plates on the car were registered to and they came back to  DR NEFTALI ORTIZ – who, according to the latest information, is a Psychiatrist who practices in Newtown at  Life Stages Counseling & Therapy: 660 Newtown Yardley Rd # 101 · (215) 860-7730

and there is also a Dr. Neftali Ortiz Dr. Neftali Ortiz,

listed at 7226 Castor Ave · (215) 742-7810

According to records, he graduated medical school from Univ Of Pr Sch Of Med, San Juan Pr 00936.

Ms. Madden shared the information on her facebook account  hoping that Dr. Ortiz will come forward and share his insurance information. So far, almost 4,000 people have shared her pictures and her posts.

I would hope that, if indeed, Dr. Ortiz is a practicing psychiatrist, he will be investigated by the proper authorities. If he can’t accept responsibility for his actions, what kind of treatment is he giving to patients?

From Holly Madden’s facebook:

Holly Madden added 2 new photos.

Yesterday at 8:31am ·

Contact Information To Help Officer Matt Hickey and K9 Ajax

UPDATE: 2/4/16: 4:15pm: UPDATE: 2/4/2016 – After much social media pressure, and what seems to be pressure from inside the City Council, Law Director Paul Bertram announced that Officer Hickey is allowed to buy K9 partner Ajax after all.

Thanks to everyone who helped make this a reality!

Here is the offical announcement:


Short story about Officer Hickey and K9 Ajax below. But these are some resources to use to help show your support and to try and to prevent K9 Ajax from going to auction and keeping him where he belongs: with Officer Matt Hickey. Friends, you can still make a difference. We have 2 days until the city council meeting on Thursday night, February 11th. Here are some people to contact as well as the official Go Fund Me Page and Facebook Support Page. If you’re on Twitter, we’ve been using the hashtags #StandWithHickey and #K9Ajax

Official Go Fund Me:

Facebook page to support Officer Hickey and K9 Ajax

Email/Call (both) to make your voice heard:

Chief of Police  Rodney Hupp, 

Law Director: Paul Bertram III

 Paul G. Bertram, III 259 Butler Street Suite 200. Marietta, OH 45750 PHONE (740) 373-4171 

FAX (740) 376-2013

Mayor Joe Matthews, Mayor740-373-1387





President of Council

Josh Schlicher   740-350-1337

1st Ward 

Roger Kalter      740-373-1784

2nd Ward

Mike McCauley  740-374-5155

3rd Ward

Steve Thomas   740-516-4153

4th Ward

Tom Vukovic     740-373-2047

At Large

Cindy Oxender  740-373-7323

Kathy Downer   740-373-7422

At Large

Sarah Snow      740-373-1387

Nancy Johnson 740-374-5501

The Quick Facts:

Officer Matt Hickey was a K9 handler with Marietta Ohio police department. He retired after 30 years because of slow to heal injuries. He stopped working in the summer of 2015 and his K9 partner Ajax has not worked since then either.

Hickey retired in January of 2016 after the police chief Rodney Hupp assured Hickey he could keep K9 Ajax if he paid for him – but if he did not pay for K9 Ajax – Hupp would send another officer to confiscate the dog.

Hickey arrived with the money and Chief Hupp changed his mind and said K9 Ajax now cost more, saying it was against the law to allow Officer Hickey to keep his dog, however, the Chief told Hickey he could keep his dog if Hickey still kept working for free as a volunteer (auxiliary).

I wrote a detailed story on it here: Officer Matt Hickey Speaks Out 

Even with incredible pressure from animal lovers, police, police supporters, and good hearted people everywhere – the “leadership” of Marietta Ohio is still refusing to allow K9 Ajax to remain with Hickey and still plans on announcing the auction date for ‘sealed’ bids on Thursday night. The Mayor and the Chief are furious that the public is putting pressure on them – yet still refuse to do what is right and logical.

The story hit the media and there was a tremendous response but then the leadership of Marietta told the media the situation was resolved when it wasn’t – so the story lost it’s traction. And now on facebook the FALSE story that Officer Hickey accepted the offer to work for free is “trending” (which leads me to wonder if there is a way to pay to have stories “trend” at the top on Facebook the way you can pay Twitter to publicize a story).

Please help – you can make a difference (or at the very least say you tried!)!    Ajax