LOVE/THOUGHTS: THE SOULMATE THING

If one person in the world was absolutely perfectly matched for you, chances are, they're not going to be in your neighborhood. Thus, the chances of running into your soulmate are slim to none; and even if you did, we have so many surface encounters that it's highly unlikely that we would recognize the person as such. It has to be rare--almost unheard of, even--to find your soulmate. But again, that doesn't mean they aren't out there somewhere.

Some take issue with the idea of a soulmate. It's so idealistic and faith-based due to the rarity of stumbling upon such a person...so how do we know they exist? It's actually highly logical that they do. Think about it this way. We have X amount of personality traits, hopes, dreams, desires, etc. If you think about it mathematically, most people are going to have some of the same traits as you. Some others might match with you better, and a handful are bound to match you frighteningly well. And, for some extremely rare cases, someone can match you across the board.

One thing that holds fairly true for me, however you look at it, is that the world is cruel. well, not precisely cruel... it's just neutral. indifferent. it has no consciousness, the universe does not form things based on any particular considerations... things just happen. there's a considerable amount of chaos in the existences of many things, and subsequently, it's difficult to make claims about some one (or perhaps even multiple) person (people) who really really fit with you.

Then there's the sexuality of the thing. a "soul mate" is rarely considered to be a "friend," it's a *lover*. so, what happens when you have an individual who lacks a sex drive? that's only the tip of the iceberg, besides... all the things that can happen to someone or the conditions a person can get. especially in the cases where you're a one-soulmate'er, the implications... i mean, what about all the people who die as kids?

And... aside from the thing that i just don't really see any reason to believe in it one way or another... that kinda gets to the point of part of my pessimism about soulmates. people who believe in 'em seem to view them as a *positive* thing, but if you think of it, the concept of a soulmate would frequently be *supremely* cruel. masses of people get their lives snuffed out by murder, war, accident, disease so commonly - if everyone has a soulmate, then our souls are being torn apart and snuffed out on a constant basis.


If there is something I'm pretty realistic about, it's love. So I don't believe in this 'soul mates' thing. I never did. But don't get me wrong, I actually think that is good. I don't believe in it, not because I was disappointed about love in the past, but to me, a healthy and great relationship can only work out if the two are involved. It's all about sharing, knowing, accepting (or not), in another words, constructing. At least for me, the idea that something all 'pre-fabricated' (it's just a silly word, I can't think of a better one right now) is right there somewhere waiting for us it's just a fairy tale and pretty unrealistic. I mean, do we really want to find another 'us'? I think many people have the potential to become 'our perfect pair' in a determined stage of our lives. I think all of my ex boyfriends (I didn't have a lot, actually, only 3 serious ones) had something I felt connected with, at that particular time. And I feel connected to my current boyfriend now as well, right now, I think he's my 'perfect match'. I don't want to think about forever, because it's such a long time and if there is something we can't be certain of, it's about future. But I think we are trying our best to construct our lives as we go through this journey.

To me, one of the problems believing in soul mates is that there is a risk you'll wait forever for that person who, to your desires, it's the right one for you, and you will look at every person you meet with judging eyes (you'll be watching if he/she fulfills your personal 'list') and you will also find defects (which, we all have, and a lot of them). And if you go into every relationship looking for the perfect one, and it never seems to appear, you could feel pretty bad about yourself too. I don't really like to read articles about 'soul mates', so I apologize if I'm getting something wrong or approaching the issue superficially, but a perception I have it's that people expect too much from others, and if they don't meet their high expectations, they become frustrated and blame on things like destiny, bad luck, or such. We grew up watching all those unrealistically romantic movies and Disney's princesses cartoons, that some people have a distorted image of love. So you may lose a lot of possibilities to be happy with the person you met. So to me, there is also no such thing as 'love at first sight', only attraction, but we have to make it work if we want to go to another level.

When I meet someone, I know the things I feel naturally atracted to, but I like to keep my mind in a 'blank page' mode, that is, letting things flow and see what happens. Not expecting anything. But of course, there are some things that you have to consider, to me for example, it's that I could accept that my partner is totally different from me, it's actually great to share different experiences and points of view, but in the end, we need to have certain common values (for example, regarding to loyalty, respect, family, trust).

Well, in the end, it's all about beliefs, and everyone knows what's better for them. So I respect people who believe in soul mates too. Maybe they are more spiritual and romantic than me. I must say that belief it's great when it helps you feel motivated, full of energy and love, and when it makes you want to become a better person. Real love does all this wonderful things. But, when it makes you feel frustrated, sad, depressed, that's when it's time to review your beliefs/statements. We can't make something as magnificent as love as a real pain in our lives! You can tell I don't identify at all with that saying: "True love hurts".

SPIRITUAL/LOVE/ PERSONAL: SHE IS MY GODDESS

First, I should say that I'm a determinist. This suggests that everything within the Universe is correlated. While this belief is not favorable to many, it symbolizes to me that my Soulmate is intertwined with everything in existence. In essence, she is my Goddess.

Suffice to say, I do not believe in multiple soulmates (friends, family, your childhood dog) like many others do. I only believe in an absolute.

It is difficult to answer what a Soulmate means to me without sharing my entire belief system. People that know me well, slowly piece together the puzzle pieces I periodically drop from time to time. Even then, most of my thoughts are intentionally locked within myself and are only intended for one specific person. I will confess that I have believed that I was in love with others in the past, but I have still never shared that side. There is only one possible moment where I will open up completely, and that is the day I propose under an aurora filled sky.

Why an aurora?
While I know I'm going on tangents here, this relates to my spiritual beliefs on people emanating energy that we are all subconsciously attuned to. I heard an old wives tale, that if you witness an aurora 'close up', the solar winds of the sun induce a seemingly hallucinogenic state. It is through this that many believe you can actually see the future for a brief moment. This is the time I intend to drop down to a knee, like a Knight swearing an oath, and speak to her of what I truly see in our future together. Tale or not, I will make that future a reality.

I will tell you that everything within the fiber of my being relates to my Soulmate. Every thought, action, or chosen word, is intended to radiate an energy that will resonate with certain types of people. Is it through these people that I most often find loyal friends, but that is not my original intent.

THOUGHTS/LOVE: THE WAY WE WERE REMINDED ME OF US

I was watching "The Way We Were" last night. I had never seen it but you know I'm a sucker for old romantic movies. And like so many things do ... I was reminded of you ... reminded of us and the way we were.

In the movie's final scene Robert Redford sees Barbra Streisand and they embrace. In that moment you can see that he realizes that he was at his best when he was with her, and that no one will ever believe in him or see as much promise in him as she once did. As they part, their past is behind them and realize that all they share now, is a memory of the way they were.

That scene reminds me of the way I feel every time we see each other now. We've both moved forward without the other. We email, text, talk, and keep up with what's going on in each others lives - we're friends again. We come together once a month for dinner or drinks and at the end of each evening out we embrace. And it's always the same we hold each other.

Really just hold on to one another - like neither of us wants to let go. I don't fight it anymore, I used to pull away because it hurt too much but now I just close my eyes and allow myself to be swept away to ... the way we were. It's unspoken yet so lovely. When we part, I don't want to let you go but yet - I know that we no longer fit together ... not the way we used to. So we go our separate ways.

Last night, after watching the movie I was once again reminded that I was at my best when I was with you and I believe you were at your best with me. No one will ever believe in me the way you did or still do.

The memory of what we had has now become my wonder wall ... the place where I can take a break from reality, smile and even laugh about, and spend time with. You’ll continue to be in thoughts, my heart, and my memories. I’m so glad for the way we were. It is unforgettable.

PERSONAL/ LOVE LETTER: WHEN WILL I MET YOU, LOVE OF MY LIFE?

When will I meet you, love of my life?...............................Or do I know you already? Will you reveal yourself in my dreams. Or will you elude me only to discover that I failed to turn the corner where you were, or recognize you when you passed my way. I know you as well as I know my own heart. You are sensitive and caring, but confident, elegant but "manly".......... You are someone I trust unquestioningly.

You can always warm my heart and make me smile. I feel I’m the most beautiful woman in the world simply because "You love me." I will make you want to try things, because of my enthusiasm when I describe them. You will excite and stimulate me in ways I never thought possible in all aspects of my life and yet, surprise me every day with how familiar it all seems.

You will make me feel grateful to just be alive and wake up in your arms. Nothing in the world will make me happier than just being with you, whether we are doing something exciting, talking together, or just sitting quietly in each others presence.

Every day with you will be new and challenging, and I will want to live a long time just to drink in what life has to offer with you. I will always be proud, just to be with you, wherever we are. And grateful the rest of the days of my life that we are together, and I got to be a vital part of yours.

I will greet you every day with a smile and a kiss; a smile will come across my face when I think of you. I hope to meet you, but more importantly, I hope you want to meet me.

THOUGHTS/JOURNAL: I HAVE A VULNERABLE HEART

I have a vulnerable heart.

My heart has been broken, crushed and trampled to millions of pieces so many times that I feel it will never survive another major disaster in life.  This scares me all the more considering I may live another 40 years more.  Nothing can assure me that from this moment on to the last of my dying breath, my heart will never be broken again.  Because of this, I constantly feel fear that any time soon; this heart will have to face another catastrophe again.  It pains me to think how can I survive?  This is how vulnerable I am at this moment.

Somebody wisely said, to truly love someone means opening your heart to the pain.  It is vulnerability.  However because of past experiences being terribly hurt tremendously by the person you love, it is normal that you are constantly wary and fearful.  It seems you are building an invisible wall in your heart trying to protect it from being hurt again.  Every little doubtful situation will cause your heart to pound with distress as you feel yourself being sucked up by bad memories causing you to be very suspicious.  The walls surrounding your heart are up a hundred fold to keep it from breaking into pieces again.  Because of your obvious distress, your eyes are physically and emotionally dimmed to the point of being temporarily blind; you don't and won't listen to anything sensible because all you feel is the fear that it is going to happen again.

Yes, I can say I have physically and emotionally moved on.  Although I have not gone far but I am glad to say I was able to move several feet away from all the ugliness.  Yet, being vulnerable makes it truly difficult to continue with the progress especially when your trust has been broken and you have to suffer the crushing of your self esteem.  Many times I am frustrated with myself because I know I wasn't like this before. Yet today, I feel I'm back to square one with no more strength to build myself up once more.

In my vulnerability, I realized I cannot do this on my own.  While I may not be young anymore and my heart is doubly tired, I feel in my weakness God is my strength.  While on my knees in deep prayer with my usual ramblings to Him, He gently reminded me that He is still the in control of my life.  It is just like bungee jumping from the top of the Eiffel Tower.  I felt myself plunging fast to my impending doom when suddenly a strong and elastic cord on my heel broke my fall.  God is my elastic cord.  I should trust Him that He will not let go of me.

Human as I am, every time I feel being thrust towards the nightmare, I would ask for assurance not to be hurt once more.  Yet, I realized I am putting my trust and faith towards someone who is as human as I am.  This is the reason why, I can still feel an impending doom hovering.  I felt the only way for me to be shielded from being hurt is to put my heart in a casket—safe from everything and everyone.  Yet, I know this is a cowardly way of moving on.

Trust in God ONLY.  Yes, this is what I have learned; what I am continually trying to embrace each day of my life.  This is the only time vulnerability becomes strength.

JOURNAL: BRUSHING YOUR TEETH WITH SOAP by rick michaels

Brushing your teeth with soap
| DR. GIFFORD-JONES

by rick michaels

Do you enjoy paying dental bills? Or having dentists scraping plaque from your teeth? If it's a pleasure, there's no need to read this column. But I've never enjoyed these regular checkups. Now there's a way to retire dentists, prevent cavities, protect gums and rid teeth of plaque, using cheap, ordinary soap.

My first reaction when I read this report was, "Come on, Dr Judd, you must be kidding! Who would ever brush their teeth with soap?" But Dr. Gerald F. Judd is no nut. He's a retired Emeritus Professor of chemistry at Purdue University.

I admire people who have the intestinal fortitude to question well-established theories that may be wrong. Besides, I discovered he and I both believe dentists are wrong on another issue.

Dr. Judd reports that acid destroys enamel and that cavities would vanish if people rinsed acids from their mouths quickly. Tap water is all that's needed to do the job.

He also claims that bacteria cannot damage the tooth's hard outer enamel that is composed of calcium hydroxy phosphate. The proof is that bones and teeth are resistant to earth-bound organisms. After all, we've all seen pictures of skeletons that have been unearthed after hundreds of years with teeth still intact.

But why use soap to clean teeth? Judd says glycerine is present in all toothpastes and it's so sticky that it requires 27 washes to clean it off. This means that teeth remain coated with a film and cannot rebuild enamel. And if they're not clean, adenosine diphosphatase cannot provide phosphate to enamel.

His next point is what I wanted to hear. Brushing with soap destroys bacteria and viruses. No professor at The Harvard Medical School told me about that. Or that brushing with ordinary bar soap not only cleans teeth but also removes hard plaque stuck to the bottom of enamel.

Removing plaque from teeth is vital as it invades gums, separating them from teeth. This sets the stage for gingivitis, poorly anchored teeth and eventually possible loss of teeth. It's shocking that 25% of North Americans over age 43, and 42% of those over 65 years of age, have no teeth!

Dr. Judd also believes that the fluoridation of water and the use of fluoride toothpaste is a useless, dangerous biological poison. He says calcium fluoride seeps into enamel, making it weak and brittle, destroying 83 enzymes along with adenosine diphosphatase.

I couldn't agree more. Look at the warning on fluoride toothpaste. Parents are told to watch children under six years of age while they brush their teeth. To be safe, only a tiny amount of toothpaste is used, and none should be swallowed. That should tell you something! In 1974, a three-year old child had fluoride gel placed on his teeth. The hygienist handed him a glass of water but rather than rising out his mouth, he drank it. A few hours later, he was dead.

If fluoride toothpaste is the answer to dental decay, why is it that 98% of Europe is fluoride-free? Sweden, Germany, Norway, Holland, Denmark and France stopped using fluoridation 29 years ago. These are not backward, depressed nations.

The sole argument for fluoridation is that it reduces tooth decay. But several studies involving as many as 480,000 children found no beneficial evidence between fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities.

Dr. Hardy Limeback, Professor of Dentistry at the University of Toronto, says children under three should never use fluoridated toothpaste or drink fluoridated water, and mothers should never use Toronto tap water to prepare baby formula.

Will I practice what I've preached in this column? You bet, as I'm curious to know whether I can say goodbye to the dental hygienist who scrapes plaque off my teeth, not to mention the cost. The test will take three months and I'll report the result.

No doubt all hell from the dental profession will descend on me. This doesn't worry me. What does is that my dentist will read this column and keep a big rusty drill handy for my next appointment.

JOURNAL: I'M TIRED

I'm tired of waking up by myself. I roll over and there's plenty of room in my bed; there's no one waiting for me in the kitchen.

I'm tired of eating breakfast alone. I turn on the TV so there's some noise while I make my food. It's not conversation, but it's better than silence.

I'm tired of being a third wheel. Or a fifth wheel. Or a seventh wheel. I act like it doesn't bother me when we're all hanging out, but really, it becomes just another reminder that I'm alone.

I'm tired of people telling me that they don't understand why I'm single. Other people, they say, it's easy to figure out why they're alone. They're mean or angry or have no drive. I'm smart, I'm attractive, I'm successful…I should have girls lining up to date. Or so they say. They can't pick anything out that's wrong with me so I shouldn't really be single.

I'm tired of people saying that they're sure I'll meet someone who's wonderful and smart and more beautiful than all of the girls I've dated before. And then, they promise, I'll be so happy that nothing else will matter.

I'm tired of going to weddings alone and having the bride or groom ask why I didn't bring a date. And then remarking that there won't be many single girls there. And then seating me at the rejects table because I don't "belong" with anyone else.

I'm tired of seeing a musical, a play, or some other event that would be a lot of fun to take a date on. And then just not going.

I'm tired of my parents remarking that by my age they already had two kids. And then remarking that they'd like to have grandchildren before they turn 70.

I'm tired of coming home after work to an empty house. I don't get to discuss the day or ask anyone how their day was.

I'm tired of eating dinner alone, on the floor, in front of the TV. My kitchen table gets no use. There's no need for setting it when it's just me eating there.

I'm tired of unwinding by myself. My couch isn't nearly as comfortable without someone to cuddle with.

I'm tired of going to bed alone. The bed is always exactly as I leftit. My side untucked, the other side tucked. It's clear that only one person has slept there. And only one person will sleep there again tonight.


I'm tired of being single.

JOURNAL; Why the Rich Recovered and the Rest Didn't Posted By: Robert Frank

Why the Rich Recovered and the Rest Didn't



Posted By: Robert Frank





The latest report from the Federal Reserve tells us that wealth of the

middle class declined by more than a third between 2007 and 2010. The

wealth of the top 10 percent, however, grew by two percent.



These statistics will no doubt fuel partisan politics by some who

argue that the rich have gained at the expense of the rest and that

the system is rigged for the rich.



There is, however, a simpler, economic reason behind the disparity.



The wealthy have a greater proportion of their wealth in stocks and

less of it in homes. Stocks and financial investments have rebounded.

Homes haven't. Or at least, not as much.



The latest Fed data doesn't break down the 2010 portfolios of each

group. That data will come later this month. But we know that in 2009,

the top one percent had only 10 percent of their wealth tied up in

their homes. They had much more of their wealth — 38 percent — in

financial investments, including 9 percent of their wealth in stocks.

(While the survey doesn't break out the performance for the one

percent, the stats for the top 10 percent are likely comparable.)



The middle class and upper-middle class, or those in the 50 to 90

percent range, had more than half of their wealth tied up their home.

They had less than a third of their wealth in financial investments

and only 1.6 percent of their wealth in stocks.



Stocks and many financial investments are now edging closer to their

pre-recession peak. Housing prices, however, remain way below their

peak—by as much as a third or more in some markets.



It's not that the wealthy was smarter than the rest. In fact, at the

bottom of the recession, the one percent lost more than the rest of

the population on the stock market slide.



But the wealthy had more surplus wealth that wasn't tied up in their

homes. That allowed them to have more money in financial investments.



Put another way, the one percent owns more than 60 percent of the

nation's individually held stocks. When markets go up, they derive

most of the benefit. When houses go down, they feel it the least.



Again, many will argue about the politics behind these differences.

But the fact is that most Americans don't have much wealth beyond

their homes. Those that do have benefited from the recovery in

financial markets—however long that lasts.

THOUGHTS

To offer no resistance to life is to be in a state of grace, ease, and lightness. This state is then no longer dependent upon things being in a certain way, good or bad. It seems almost paradoxical, yet when your inner dependency on form is gone, the general conditions of your life, the outer forms, tend to improve greatly.

See if you can catch yourself complaining in either speech or thought, about a situation you find yourself in, what other people do or say, your surroundings, your life situation, even the weather. To complain is always nonacceptance of what is. It invariably carries an unconscious negative charge. When you complain, you make yourself a victim. Leave the situation or accept it. All else is madness.

LOVE/THOUGHT/JOURNAL: WHY SO MAN WOMAN CAN'T FIND THE RIGHT GUY

One has to be skeptical of the beautiful, intelligent, fully capable woman who simply says that she can’t find a good man anywhere. I know a couple of woman who are well-balanced and who also appreciate the idea of respecting men in the same way they would like to be respected, have no trouble finding suitable mates. Sorry to break this to you, but the only constant variable in your relationships is a person called YOU. I think that if you have trouble finding a good man its because you have become enchanted with the dream-like alpha male: the guy who fits every single portion of the checklist (height, income, education, toe nail length, swag, etc.), but who may not be available for a monogamous, long-term relationship. What many women seem to forget is that there are some men who always have room for another woman on the roster. If you’re wasting all your time with the lying, cheating, super dog, you might miss out on the chance to be with the man who will love you forever and father all of your children. He may not come in the same package, and by comparing the two without considering the differences in what each of them offers, you may be passing up on your opportunity.

I have heard many woman talk about how they can't find a good man. The truth is, they are not looking in the right places and they are not being true to themselves. A relationship is a "give and take" situation. You have to think about what you are willing to give and what you want out of a relationship to make it work. As much as I hate to say it.... a lot of times what you see is what you get. This is true with guys and women. If you are looking for a woman who will love you, be loyal, and stand by you through thick and thin, then continue reading.

So, if you are wondering "where are all the good men?" - think about all the things you may have said or done to any man you've dated. Chances are, you had a good man, but good isn't good enough. It seems to me that women just want a "perfect" man. You show me a perfect woman, and I'll show you Jesus. Here's a secret about men: love a man unconditionally and he will happily worship the ground you walk on See how that works? It's not easy, but nobody ever said love is easy.. You'll get what you're looking for, and most men will be what you want them to be if you treat them right.

One of the most important qualities for me is her level of intelligence.Finding someone with a similar level of education or intellect ensures you will always have something to talk about and you will not be frustrated with a partner who does not care about or understand topics that you find important. If the relationship is going to last, the woman and man both need to have something to say.

I had a debate with my friend-girl one day about her odds of success versus mine. At the time, I assumed we had the same odds of initially meeting a good man/woman. If 10 random men approached you, how many of them would be, at minimum, boyfriend material? it is rarely above 50% it is my understanding there are more women than men on Earth and in most major cities

A lot of women "not all" (because i have met many that aren't) are looking for that guy that "has it all" in their eyes". So it is not true that men do not like to get married. In my opinion, what is happening is that we have become more picky now since technology allows us to search from a larger pool of candidates (so we keep looking for that perfect match, that truly doesn't exist) and two, despite the advances in technology, there is no perfect system yet that can bring two people on this planet who are made for each other


I hear a lot of women (and sometimes, even myself) complain about not being able to find a guy that measures up to their “high standards”. Sometimes I have to ask what they consider standards, because some of these so-called standards are just ridiculous.

Take for instance a friend of mine who I love dearly, but has some of the most bizarre “standards” I’ve seen. I’m not going to say her standards are ridiculously high, because they’re not. I’ve seen her turn down nice, good looking, respectable, guys and go for better looking guys who happen to be assholes that treat her like crap. If her standards were at all high, she wouldn’t for one minute accept how some of the guys she has dated act.

it occurred to me that most of the women I talk to list certain heights as “requirements”. He can’t be shorter than 6′. He has to be at least 2″ taller than me when I have heels on.

REALLY!? Really? Really.

C’mon, let’s think about this for a second:

Since when has a person’s height had ANYTHING to do with the things that matter? Like if he’ll treat you well, make you laugh, have good conversations with you or even give you great sex!? Give me a one good reason, ladies, that being short has anything do with that without putting your own insecurities out there.




Heres an example. Lets say im only attracted based on my standards to 3% of the population. i dont even notice the other 97% despite there being plenty of good women in that 97%, albeit missing certain qualities here and there. But since im so focused on that small percent the chances are slim to none of me scoring a mate from that "worthy" market. There is pleny of good mates FOR both sides. The question is when do we re-evaluate our standards to focus on must needs instead of wants+needs.

The reason men might have better options is because initially, we don't have that much criteria. Im convinced the majority of men are looking at women from a sexual perspective first. Thats why we dont have the same laundry list of deal breakers that women do. ONce we get past that and get to know a woman better, then we are pulling out our questionnaires to see whats good.

Men also have the f*ck it factor – we are willing to say f*ck it and deal with certain unpleasing qualities in women if the whole > the sum of their parts. Women won't do the same (not that theres anything wrong with that)

What Im saying is that men see women first for their physical characteristics. If that is appealing to them, then they make sure the major points are covered

1) is she crazy? Will she left eye Lopez (RIP) the crib? Will she stalk me?

2) is her personality agreeable? Does she sound like a dumb box of rocks or is she as interesting as drying paint? is she cool?

3) General BG – Who do I know that knows her? School? Job? Is she lookin for a come-up? etc.

These are major points we can ascertain from a few convos or initial meeting. From there its a go. Over time is where men decide whether it can go past physical or just "attraction" to something realer. I would argue thqat 90% of relationships on a mans side originated from "shes attractive I want her" to "shes GF material"



Do you seriously believe that a man's brain works through some sort of algorithm?

(1) Meet woman
(2) Date woman
(3) Have sex with woman
(4) Have LTR with woman
(5) Make decision about woman
(5a) Is woman hot?
(5b) Is woman hot enough?
(5c) Is woman too hot?
(5d) Does woman have good head on her shoulders?
(5e) Does head on shoulders conflict with hotness?
(5f) Perform cost/benefit analysis
(6) Marry / Don't marry woman.

Some things are rational, some are not. Any relationship is a mix of the two. Rational decisions can be applied in RLs, but attraction itself is not rational.

Yes, a man will want to marry a woman with a good head on her shoulders. He will also want to be attracted to her. But I think you are assuming that attraction is based only on looks. Some of it is to do with her looks. Some of it is to do with her personality. The balance of those things is down to the individual man. There is no single answer. The closest you can get to one is that "Men want good personality + good looks". Like I said, common sense should tell you that.


I don't necessarily think there are less "good" men from which women can select. I think there are less men who want the same kind of committed that the majority of women want. I believe the majority of women want a strong, exclusive relationship w/a man she adores and he adores her back. But it seems that a lot of men don't want this until later in their life. I hate the term "settle down" because it implies that one a person decides to commit to one person that they are some how settling. It seems that a lot of men feel that they have to all their fun as a bachelor. Once they are old, tired and spent they will fully commit to someone. Women seem to view a commitment/marriage like the beginning of a whole new world where they will have a partner to enjoy life with and build together. Men and women just view marriage very different. So it's not so much that there aren't good men. I think it's a shortage of men who don't absolutely dread the idea or marriage or long term committment and think it's something embark on once they've squoze every ounce of fun outta their bachelorhood that they can.





When someone uses that excuse that there aren't any good men or not as many good men, I hear that to mean, she doesn't think she has the quan to get the man she wants and needs more chances. If you are happy with the type of men you attract and that approach you, GREAT! However, if you are not, it seems to me that you might want to make a change of some kind because you are not happy with your results and I doubt applying the same formula to the same problem will ever return a different result…namely, because that doesn't make any damn sense. So the problem, if you can call it a problem, is not a shortage of one gender, changes in gender roles, or anything else. The cause lies solely with the person deciding upon who they feel meets their standards. If you decide all you want is to date an educated man or woman with a good personality, you're dating pool opens up. If your ideal mate has to be no shorter than 6'3" or no taller than 5'3", has good hair, skin the color of cafe au lait, commands $75K+ per year, and has a DD cup or 10 inches, then your options narrow…considerably. Many men who have the qualities that most women would deem "good men," ie men who are: handsome, attractive, sexy, have swag, charming, educated, good job, making good money (close to six figures), out-going, fun-loving, romantic, kind, caring, considerate, etc etc etc Do Not necessarily want a long term, committed relationship, much less marriage.You have to become what you want in most all things in this life. Women don't really understand how much power they have. They have the ability to obtain good men – if they are good women. If every man on earth had to be a "stand up guy" in order to get somewhere (sexually or otherwise) with women the perspective would be very different. Men do a lot for the attention of women. Ideally if the requirements change, so does the market – and therefore the results.

JOURNAL; Why Can't Obama Bring Wall Street to Justice? by Peter J. Boyer , Peter Schweizer

Obama’s 2009 White House summit with finance titans, in which the president warned that only he was standing "between you and the pitchforks"

Why, despite widespread outrage, financial-fraud prosecutions by the Department of Justice are at 20-year lows
Attorney General Eric Holder’s lucrative ties to a top-tier law firm whose marquee clients include some of finance’s worst offenders
How Obama’s trumpeted “task force” for investigating risky mortgage lenders—announced in this year’s State of the Union speech—is badly understaffed and has yet to produce any discernible progress
With the Occupy protesters resuming battle stations, and Mitt Romney in place as the presumptive Republican nominee, President Obama has begun to fashion his campaign as a crusade for the 99 percent--a fight against, as one Obama ad puts it, "a guy who had a Swiss bank account." Casting Romney as a plutocrat will be easy enough. But the president's claim as avenging populist may prove trickier, given his own deeply complicated, even conflicted, relationship with Big Finance.

Obama came into office vowing to end business as usual, and, in the gray post-crash dawn of 2009, nowhere did a reckoning with justice seem more due than in the financial sector. The public was shaken, and angry, and Wall Street seemed oblivious to its own culpability, defending extravagant pay bonuses even while accepting a taxpayer bailout. Obama channeled this anger, and employed its rhetoric, blaming the worldwide economic collapse on "the reckless speculation of bankers." Two months into his presidency, Obama summoned the titans of finance to the White House, where he told them, "My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks."

The bankers may have found the president's tone unsettling. Candidate Obama had been their guy, accepting vast amounts of Wall Street campaign money for his victories over Hillary Clinton and John McCain (Goldman Sachs executives ponied up $1 million, more than any other private source of funding in 2008). Obama far outraised his Republican rival, John McCain, on Wall Street--around $16 million to $9 million. As it turned out, Obama apparently actually meant what he said at that White House meeting--his administration effectively would stand between Big Finance and anything like a severe accounting. To the dismay of many of Obama's supporters, nearly four years after the disaster, there has not been a single criminal charge filed by the federal government against any top executive of the elite financial institutions.

"It's perplexing at best," says Phil Angelides, the Democratic former California treasurer who chaired the bipartisan Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission. "It's deeply troubling at worst."

More From the Beast

Ranking: America's 10 Fattest Cities

Elizabeth Warren's Cherokee Imbroglio

Strikingly, federal prosecutions overall have risen sharply under Obama, increasing dramatically in such areas as civil rights and health-care fraud. But according to the Transactional Records Access Clearinghouse, a data-gathering organization at Syracuse University, financial-fraud prosecutions by the Department of Justice are at 20-year lows. They're down 39 percent since 2003, when fraud at Enron and WorldCom led to a series of prosecutions, and are just one third of what they were during the Clinton administration. (The Justice Department says the numbers would be higher if new categories of crime were counted.)

Photos: Who They Are—and What They Got Away With


Getty Images (3); Paul J. Richards / AFP-Getty Images

"There hasn't been any serious investigation of any of the large financial entities by the Justice Department, which includes the FBI," says William Black, an associate professor of economics and law at the University of Missouri, Kansas City, who, as a government regulator in the 1980s, helped clean up the S&L mess. Black, who is a Democrat, notes that the feds dealt with the S&L crisis with harsh justice, bringing more than a thousand prosecutions, and securing a 90 percent conviction rate. The difference between the government's response to the two crises, Black says, is a matter of will, and priorities. "You need heads on the pike," he says. "The first President Bush's orders were to get the most prominent, nastiest frauds, and put their heads on pikes as a demonstration that there's a new sheriff in town."

Obama delivered heated rhetoric, but his actions signaled different priorities. Had Obama wanted to strike real fear in the hearts of bankers, he might have appointed former special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald or some other fire-breather as his attorney general. Instead, he chose Eric Holder, a former Clinton Justice official who, after a career in government, joined the Washington office of Covington & Burling, a top-tier law firm with an elite white-collar defense unit. The move to Covington, and back to Justice, is an example of Washington's revolving-door ritual, which, for Holder, has been lucrative--he pulled in $2.1 million as a Covington partner in 2008, and $2.5 million (including deferred compensation) when he left the firm in 2009.

Related

Peter Schweizer: Congress's Corruption Racket

Putting a Covington partner--he spent nearly a decade at the firm--in charge of Justice may have sent a signal to the financial community, whose marquee names are Covington clients. Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Bank of America, Wells Fargo, and Deutsche Bank are among the institutions that pay for Covington's legal advice, some of it relating to matters before the Department of Justice. But Holder's was not the only face at Justice familiar to Covington clients. Lanny Breuer, who had co-chaired the white-collar defense unit at Covington with Holder, was chosen to head the criminal division at Obama's Justice. Two other Covington lawyers followed Holder into top positions, and Holder's principal deputy, James Cole, was recruited from Bryan Cave LLP, another white-shoe firm with A-list finance clients.

Justice's defenders point out that prosecuting financial crime is a complicated matter requiring the highly specialized expertise found in the white-collar defense bar. But some suggest there is also the potential for conflicting interest when the department's top officials come from lucrative law practices representing the very financial institutions that Justice is supposed to be investigating. "And that's where they're going back to," says Black. "Everybody knows there is a problem with that." (Two members of Holder's team have already returned to Covington.) A spokesperson for Covington was not available for comment. (Newsweek uses the firm as outside counsel.)


Top bankers after meeting with Obama, who told them “my administration is the only thing standing between you and the pitchforks.” (Mark Wilson / Getty Images)

Justice's inaction regarding the big Wall Street firms is not for a lack of suspicious activity. Three different government entities exhaustively examined the practices that contributed to the financial collapse, and each has referred its findings to the department for possible criminal investigation. One such matter involved a 2007 transaction by Goldman Sachs, in which Goldman created an investment, based on mortgage-backed securities, that seemed designed to fail. Goldman allowed a client who was betting against the mortgage market to help shape the investment instrument, which was called Abacus 2007-AC1; then both Goldman and the client bet against the investment without informing other clients (whose investments were wagers on its success) how the securities included in the portfolio were selected. These uninformed clients lost more than $1 billion on the investment. In 2010, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Goldman with securities fraud "for making materially misleading statements and omissions" in marketing the investment. The SEC, which conducts only civil litigation, referred the case to Justice for criminal investigation.

A year later, in April 2011, the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, chaired by Democrat Carl Levin, after a two-year inquiry, issued a fat report detailing several transactions, including Goldman's Abacus deal, that Levin and his staff believed should be investigated by Justice as possible crimes. The subcommittee made a formal referral to the department (as did the federal Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission, chaired by Phil Angelides), and Levin publicly stated his view that criminal inquiry was warranted. Goldman executives, including the firm's chief executive officer, Lloyd Blankfein, started hiring defense lawyers.

Meanwhile, Obama's political operation continued to ask Wall Street for campaign money. A curious pattern developed. A Newsweek examination of campaign finance records shows that, in the weeks before and after last year's scathing Senate report, several Goldman executives and their families made large donations to Obama's Victory Fund and related entities, some of them maxing out at the highest individual donation allowed, $35,800, even though 2011 was an electoral off-year. Some of these executives were giving to Obama for the first time.

Justice insists that political operations such as fundraising are kept strictly distanced from the department, in order to avoid even the appearance of political influence. But the attorney general and his team are not unfamiliar with the process; Holder was himself an Obama bundler--a fundraiser who collected large sums from various donors--in 2008, as were several other lawyers who joined him at Justice.

It would be a leap to infer these Goldman contributions were made--or received--as quid pro quo for dropping a criminal investigation. Still, the situation constitutes what one Justice veteran acknowledged is a "bad set of facts."

Maintaining public faith in the justice system is one of the reasons why people such as Angelides continue to call for a rigorous criminal investigation into Wall Street. "I think it's fundamental that people in this country need to feel that the justice system is for everyone--that there's not one system for those people of enormous wealth and power, and one for everyone else," he says.

In July 2010, three months after the SEC charged Goldman in the Abacus case, the agency reached a settlement with the firm. Goldman agreed to pay $550 million, but admitted no wrongdoing. The agency touted the amount of the fine as the biggest ever--but to Goldman it was a relative pittance. The fine amounted to about 4 percent of the sum that Goldman paid its executives in bonuses ($12.1 billion) in 2007, the year of the Abacus transaction.

Earlier this year, it was reported that Goldman executives were feeling optimistic that the Justice inquiry would not result in criminal charges against the firm, or its executives. Goldman declined to comment on the case, as did the Justice Department. But spokeswoman Alisa Finelli said, "When we find credible evidence of intentional criminal conduct--by Wall Street executives or others--we will not hesitate to charge it. However, we can and will only bring charges when the facts and the law convince us that we can prove a crime beyond a reasonable doubt." Holder, speaking in February at Columbia University, said that while "we found that much of the conduct that led to the financial crisis was unethical and irresponsible ... we have also discovered that some of this behavior--while morally reprehensible--may not necessarily have been criminal."

Midway through his State of the Union speech this year, President Obama announced plans "to create a special unit of federal prosecutors and leading state attorneys general to expand our investigations into the abusive lending and packaging of risky mortgages that led to the housing crisis," and he vowed again to "hold accountable those who broke the law."

That portion of the speech had a familiar ring. In November 2009, Attorney General Holder, with Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner at his side, announced the creation of another special unit--the Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force--that was similarly charged with investigating securities and mortgage fraud that contributed to the financial meltdown. Since its creation, that task force, which critics say was drastically under-resourced, has produced not a single conviction (or even indictment) of a major Wall Street player related to the financial disaster.

Some who heard the president's State of the Union speech thought they discerned a hidden purpose behind his new "special unit"--the Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Working Group, as it would be called. The day before the president's speech, state attorneys general from around the country met in Chicago with Justice officials to discuss a proposed national settlement with five major banks, including JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America, over questionable foreclosure practices. The administration was pushing the settlement, as were the banks. But a handful of attorneys general were resisting the settlement, believing it gave too much away to the banks--including protection from mortgage-related investigations that were still unfolding. These holdout state officials were supported by a coalition of activists, who argued that the banks would never make meaningful concessions--such as the reduction of principal on underwater mortgages--unless they faced the threat of investigation.

One of those activists, Mike Gecan, of the Industrial Areas Foundation, says he was disheartened when he heard Obama's speech, and the news that New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman would be co-chairing the new "working group." Schneiderman, who is in the tough-guy mold of his predecessors, Eliot Spitzer and Andrew Cuomo, had been a leader of the state holdouts; now, Gecan feared, Schneiderman had been co-opted by the Chicago Way. "I'm from Chicago, I've seen this game played my whole life," he says.

Gecan's view seemed vindicated two weeks later, when Obama announced that the settlement had been reached.

Nearly three months later, it is not clear what, if any, progress the "working group" has made. The unit was only promised 55 investigators, attorneys, and support staff--a tiny fraction of the resources afforded to similar groups investigating the S&L and Enron/WorldCom scandals--and it is not clear that even that commitment has materialized. "I think what happened is what usually happens: the administration rope-a-doped," says Gecan. "There's no office, there's no director, there's no staff, there's no space, there's no phone."

Last month, Gecan wrote an op-ed article for the New York Daily News, calling upon Schneiderman to quit the group in protest (Schneiderman's office did not respond to requests for an interview). In the meantime, Gecan said, he will work to bring pressure on Obama. "There's a little presidential campaign that's going to start, and we're going to make this issue central to this campaign," he said.

It may be, as the attorney general points out, that Wall Street was greedy, stupid, and immoral, without actually breaking any laws. But the powers of the Justice Department are immense, and a more aggressive prosecutor surely could have found cases to make. Black, the UMKC professor, says the conduct could well have violated federal fraud statutes--"securities fraud for false disclosures, wire and mail fraud for making false representations about the quality of the loans and derivatives they were selling, bank fraud for false representations to the regulators."

The absence of prosecutions, and the fact that the cops on the beat hail from the place that represents the banks, does not sit right with many who hoped Obama would fulfill his promise to hold Big Finance accountable. The left's frustration fuels the Occupy movement, and chills the Democratic base. And it gives Romney, the career capitalist, an opening he is avidly exploiting.

Through last fall, Obama had collected more donations from Wall Street than any of the Republican candidates; employees of Bain Capital donated more than twice as much to Obama as they did to Romney, who founded the firm. By this spring, however, resolution had come to the GOP contest, and Wall Street could see a friendly alternative to Obama. While most of Romney's contributions so far come mainly from the financial sector, Obama's donations from Wall Street have dropped sharply.

But this turn may yet help Obama, playing into the Romney-as-plutocrat theme. Just the other week, the Republican candidate quietly slipped into a fundraiser at the home of hedge-fund king John Paulson, who made a killing shorting mortgage futures (including about $1 billion on the Abacus deal). The Obama campaign pounced. Obama may yet fully liberate his inner populist--that Obama who in 2010 in an off-Prompter moment uttered a sentence that made blood run cold on Wall Street: "I do think at a certain point you've made enough money."

LOVE: REASON WHY I HAVEN'T FOUND THE ONE

10 reasons why I can't STILL find my soulmate

I may not believe in destiny or fate but, for some odd reason, I believe in finding my better half or my soulmate. For years, i’ve been trying to find one through the method of “collect and select”. Sad to say, I can’t still find him. I know that this may not be the proper time yet to find him and be my husband but, I would gladly meet and entertain him any time. I know that you may not really know it at first sight but, you’ll feel it when you actually met him. I’m such a hopeless romantic. Needless to say, i’ve been thinking of any reasons if I can’t find him and I’ll just move on with my life without any man at my side. I came up with  10 reasons on why I can’t find my dearest soulmate.

10. He/she may have already died or killed himself/herself.

 Think about it. He/She may have met an unfortunate accident before we actually meet them. Sad to say, this can happen. He/she might have died before birth or after birth. In a more negative point of view, he/she may have killed himself/herself, believing that there’s no one else in the world that would love them or care for them.

On the side note, may their souls rest in peace.

9. He/She may have been with the wrong person all along.

This is quite inevitable. Almost everyone has experienced this. We think that we found the right person yet, he/she isn’t the ONE we’ve been waiting for all our lives. Also, he/she might have been forced into an arranged marriage/marriage out of convenience. Well, that can certainly happen as well.

8. He might be a priest right now or someone who can’t marry due to his/her duties.

No doubt about it. I know that I may be going to hell for this but, sometimes, I think that there are priests that may be our soulmates. However, they chose to be with God. there’s nothing wrong about it, i guess.

7. He/She forgets about love due to his/her career/studies/obligation.

Yes. There are a lot of people like that. They forget about the aspect of love due to their love for their career and such. They chose to be loyal on what they do in life. This isn’t really selfish at all if you’re doing it for mankind. Needless to say, it’s still a loss for love and a gain for humanity.

6. He/She may be gay or a tomboy.

 Sometimes, this happens too. There’s nothing with it. We could only accept them as they are right now. This may sound cliche but, if there are happy with their lives right now, we could only be happy for them as well. He/She may find their love.

5. He/She might really love someone else more than you.

This is harder to accept than anything else in the world. :(

4. He/She might be in a coma or have a physical/mental sickness right now.

This could also happen as well as if, time has stopped for them in this world. There’s nothing wrong with this. Just be patient, okay.

On the side note, let’s pray for them to get well soon.

3. He/She’s still in the process of finding you.

Hey! Out of 7 billion people in this world, almost 3.5 billion people can be your soulmate. He/She may still be a child or already an older man/woman. Love has no age or boundaries as well so, live with it! It’s hard to find you, you know.

2. He/She’s still trying to accept you.

Believe me. This is harder than we thought it could be. We may not believe that he/she is our actual soulmate. He/She may be far from our ideal man/woman or we’re far from his/her ideal man/woman. Well, he/she may or may not accept you.

1. We’re just too blind.

Let’s not forget that we have our own faults as well. Sometimes, we’re just too blind. Our soulmate may already be infront of you yet, we ignore them because we can’t accept the fact that he/she’s our soulmate. He/she may be the person who got friendzoned by you. We might be the one who ruined the chance of finding our soulmate. Sometimes, we’re just too insensitive, i guess. So, Be careful, ne?  Whatever decision you’ll make in your life might lose our chance on finding the ONE.

LOVE/THOUGHT/JOURNAL: YOU ARE LOVE REMEMBER

For years, I tried to find "The One.” Everywhere I went, I was looking. Dinner parties, political functions, Sunday morning services, the dry cleaners, the subway car Not even going to the market at midnight gave me a reprieve from my relentless search. Yet, in spite of all this looking, I never found HER anywhere. If I was trying that hard and still couldn't force love to come my way, how can I now suggest that you actually commit yourself to finding something which we apparently have little to no control over?

Here’s why. The love I sought remained out of reach until I’d actually set an intention to find love and committed myself 100% to becoming the man I would need to be in order to attract it. I'm convinced of it

Remember, in our inmost being, we are all completely lovable because spirit is love. Beyond what anyone can make you think or feel about yourself, your unconditioned spirit stands, shining with a love nothing can tarnish.

After a few (or many) bad relationships, it’s so easy to shut down, give up, and stop believing that the right person is out there for us. Our hearts yearn to fall in love, but our minds insist it’s not possible, and we enter into a tug-of-war with ourselves. It’s as if one part of us is screaming, Yes! I deserve a great relationship! while another part insists, I’ll never find him or her. When our beliefs contradict our desires, we experience an inner conflict that not only paralyzes us, but can actually prevent us from recognizing the possibilities for love that exist all around us.


The universal Law of Attraction states that we draw to us those people, events, and circumstances that match our inner state of being. In other words, we attract experiences that are consistent with our beliefs. If we believe that there is plenty of love in the world and we are worthy of giving and receiving that love, we will attract a different quality of relationships than someone who believes in scarcity or feels unworthy of happiness. If we believe the world is a loving and friendly place, then most of the time that will be our experience. If we believe the world is a chaotic, stressful, and fearful place, then eventually that will become our reality. So, believing and knowing that your soulmate is out there is a critical first step in the formula for manifesting him or her into your life.


It amazes me that people think their soul mate is going to show up in their life at this predestined time and be this flawless person. A true soul mate is a mirror of yourself, the person who shows you everything that is holding you back, the person who brings you to your own attention so you can change your life. Sure, they have a common upbringing, similar interests but they have the one thing you don’t have which is the introspection to help you become great. What use is a soul mate if they can’t help free you from yourself so you can live your life mission?”

What is it which makes a man and a woman know that they, of all other men and women in the world, belong to each other? Is it no more than chance and meeting? no more than being alive together in the world at the same time? Is it only a curve of the throat, a line of the chin, the way the eyes are set, a way of speaking? Or is it something deeper and stranger, something beyond meeting, something beyond chance and fortune? Are there others, in other times of the world, whom we should have loved, who would have loved us? Is there, perhaps, one soul among all others--among all who have lived, the endless generations, from world's end to world's end--who must love us or die? And whom we must love, in turn--whom we must seek all our lives long--headlong and homesick--until the end?”

POETRY:AS I STAR LONGINGLY AT YOU

Raven-haired lover, so dear and so warm,
cling to me tightly - unfurl all your charm.
Darkling, yet radiant - wild, gentle, serene -
Beneath all your cover - a mystery unseen.

Fantastic, delightful, emotional creature -
Love's "vessel of bon-bons", a quadruple feature.
Shy and retiring - wild as March gusts.
Playful, deceitful - harbinger of trust.

Deceiver of minions - not used to her ways,
my senses arousing as coyly she plays -
upon my emotions - a lightning-hot glance...
thrills and enthralls me - I haven't a chance.

Beckoning, spurning - just one step ahead.
A hunt run too swiftly - prey, skillfully led.
Turning, retraceing - triumphant when caught
Proud and submissive - a purchase well-bought!






PART II

It's been a long, long time.
I have seen you over and again.
The smile that reaches across my heart
hasn't faded, despite all the change.

As I stare longingly at you,
from across the room, you don't know
what thoughts cross my mind...
Or images which pass before my eyes.

And maybe you
can see into my heart...
After many years,a spark
has risen inside yours.

We can laugh at the damnedest things...
Smile at a joke, we only, know.
Grimace, at a memory between us,
and look forward to many more.

Hearts broken by so many others,
yet, not allowed to search together.
Kept apart by a mystery to me...
But it keeps coming back to my heart.

And maybe you can see
that I am still here.
After many years,
I can't seem to break your spell.

You have such a hold on me!
If only you could see the way I smile,
so deep inside...
All the tears, in solitude, I cried.

Some things I just can't quit.
Even a love unrequited...
And maybe you would be
able to feel the love.

And maybe you would
see inside my heart.
It could be so good,
A love for all time...

If only you would
let us cross that line...

It could be me,
And...
Maybe...
You???

LOVE/THOUGHT/JOURNAL: INFATUATED WITH A SINGLE SOUL

There will come a time in your life when you become absolutely infatuated with a single soul. For this person, you'd do anything & not think twice about it, but when asked why, you have no answer. You'll try your whole life to understand how a single person can affect you as much as they do, but you'll never find out. & no matter how badly it hurts or how badly you hate it, you'll love this person for the rest of your life without regret. And even though she doesn't believe in love, he's determined to call her bluff don't let anyone ever promise you that they won't ever hurt you because at one time or another, it'll happen. the real promise is if the time you spent together will be worth the pain in the end.

I kinda miss the bond we shared. I mean, who wouldn't miss that comfortable feeling with a person?

Where we could talk for hours about everything, anything, and not have a problem with the silence in the middle. Can't forget all the ridiculous stuff we did. Stupid or not, everything was just so fun. Endless nights, real talks, the "remember whens", I remember it all. And it's funny what life does, how it could just give you things and take it away so soon. I really can't get it out of my head that you grow distant from people and that good things come to an end sooner or later. But along the way, I learned one good thing about life; it goes on, you just gotta pick yourself up and learn to keep up.

So you make up excuses for why she never comes around. And I know she's going to show up saying she misses you, but honestly whose fault is that? Your address is the same and your phone numbers haven't changed. There's just no excuse for it this time.

That's what you do when you care about someone. You fight like hell to make sure you keep them. Even if they aren't yours. You fight just to know you're alive. Because you know that without them, you'd have no reason to breathe.

Truth is, sometimes you scare the shit out of me. You make me feel as if I’m not alone. Yet, I know any minute you have the ability to rip that feeling from me. Truth is, I love you, and that in itself, is scary enough.

I'm done with the bullshit. Love is a four letter lie when it comes to you.

You turned around and lied without a second thought.

Did I even cross your mind? Or were you just too busy planning with him

Strength isn't about how much you can handle before you break. It's about how much you can handle after you break.

Maybe I fell for your smile, or the way you always say what you mean...without ever actually saying what you mean. I don't know why or how, but I fell. So here it is, my confession to you...I'm insanely and unnaturally in love with you.

You are an amazing creature. You deserve to be loved until your insides melt. Don't give up on all the things you want. When you meet the right person you will have zero doubt in your mind. Zero.