Thursday, December 5, 2013

Can Congress Lead the Blind

Can Congress Lead The Blind?

Yesterday I watched and listened intently as Rep Michelle Bachman reported the House Judiciary Committee was actually entertaining a hearing on “constraining” Presidential powers in the executive order arena. Representative Bachman used some of the most provocative and exciting language I’ve ever heard about Obama including “he’s not a king”, “he’s acting like a dictator”, “he doesn’t want to uphold the Constitution”, “ he wants to be a law unto himself rather than have everyone come under the law, he wants to be above the law”.

Breaking News: Bachmann reports House Judiciary Committee meeting discussing over-reach of the White House. Obama is not a King, no man is above the law.

Well, I see only one minor problem with that. The fuel for Congressmen Bachman’s assertions as well as the House Judiciary Committee comes more from the executive order of Obama’s exempting ‘small businesses’ from signing up for Obamacare until after the 2014 elections.

Republicans have staked their whole existence on America’s outrage over Obamacare and Obama’s out smarting them by exempting every vote the Democratic Party needs to gain control of the House and keep control of the Senate, while hopefully maintaining the White House with whomever they decide to run in 2014.

What this shows you exactly is the Republicans lack of ability to actually employ the Constitution upon themselves in an Open Hearing on Obama’s eligibility to even sign laws into existence that the House and Senate have passed. If the Republican controlled House Judiciary Committee actually employed an investigation Hearing into the fraud and deception of Obama as a natural born citizen they’d find his long form birth certificate that he actually handed out from the White House press core room to be nothing more then a fabrication, and they’d also find Obama is not a ‘natural born citizen’ who was born in the U.S. to Citizen parents.

They would find in this Hearing that even mentioning Obama as “president” is actually a verification and authentication of complicity of this fraud and deception that quite frankly is summed up with one word: usurpation.
The House’s Judiciary Committee undertaking a hearing to rein in the President’s ability to issue ‘executive orders’ however does expose for all of us that the Republicans are seeing the writing on the wall and it says “LOSER 2014 AGAIN”. The undertaking of the committee shows the near panic mode of squirming the Republicans are in over Obama’s ability to rule by ‘executive order’ in putting off anything really painful to those political donations coming in from small businesses and large businesses and those working for the federal government.

Wouldn’t it be interesting to see just how much the Democratic Party has taken in as far as political contributions over the last little while from small business owners if indeed the exemption was solicited? I mean why is it that more and more its getting easier to count the people who have an exemption to Obamacare rather then to count the people who have the wonderful opportunity to sign up and pay for the spectacularly expensive Obamacare? I mean look at what the Government rolled out for a web site with a billion dollars and you haven’t yet begun to understand the cost of Obamacare as a tax hike.

Of course you and I know that all the ‘rest of us’ would also get an exemption if the House Judiciary Committee would simply OPEN A HEARING on Obama’s eligibility to sign laws into existence. They actually have the power to show in a hearing Obama has no legal qualification to sign any executive order because he’s not a qualified occupant of the White House. He’s very existence in the White House is predicated upon a violation of our Constitution.

I was thinking its kind of fun but certainly a conundrum to be a rebel for the Constitution against the Government of the United States filled with men and women who have sworn oaths to the Constitution as hypocrites. The relative ease at which the Republicans could hold Obama’s feet to the Constitutional fire on his qualifications by simply OPENING A HEARING on the matter, shows you the core issue of exactly why Glen Beck is screaming “DEFUND THE GOP”.

They have refused to do it so far, however, the latest attempt at curbing executive orders of the President, shows you they are fit-to-be-tied over the presumption of brilliance Obama has to exempt any major donors and voting blocks from obamacare until after the election.

So are Republicans just dumb when it comes to Constitutional OPEN HEARINGS on Obama’s eligibility as a qualified person brought to them by a Presidential Candidate actually who ran in the Democratic Party, or are they just embarrassed by their own record over the past 5 years as Obama’s whipping boy as they see their plans for 2014 vanish into thin air?

Republican law makers right now are headed for a dirt run way with a giant plane hoping things work out in a landing.
You know I have come to respect immensely the ‘conservative’ ways of Republicans when it comes to financial matters, but I think that’s about it. My State of Utah Governor Gary Herbert actually announced yesterday something like a 242 Million dollar surplus in our State Budget. I was so dog-gone proud of that I felt like walking over to the capital and giving him a great big hug. Wow! Out of all the States of the Union mine was one who after all was said and done had a ‘surplus’. The State of Utah’s credit rating has got to be pretty high on the charts and our state emblem of the ‘bee-hive’ definitely a tell of industry and resourcefulness of the population.

We actually have a State Government willing to not spend everything coming in and less willing to rob you blind. He did mention this could be wiped out very easily with Federal Tax hikes. "The $120 million in added rainy-day funding brings the state's total rainy-day balance to $400 million, up from $277 million last year, according to figures provided by the governor's office."

Now what did I like about the Democratic Party that caused me to run in 2004 in the U.S. Senate Race? I loved the sense of justice and conservative values under the Constitution that was represented by the 10% that stopped the rest of the Democratic Party from rolling over our Constitutional rights. The power of the minority and respect for the individual that the Democratic Party used to represent was at that time an attraction for me that I did not see in the Republican Party whatsoever and believe it or not that 10% came from the Gay and Lesbian caucuses.

So there’s two conservative principles that both parties have had at different times in just the state of Utah that I have admired. Obviously in divulging the few things I liked you may surmise there is a host of things I know longer associate myself with Republicans or Democrats for what have to do with their embarrassment and the lack of responsibility towards the Constitution.

The Democratic Party has gone over the cliff with Obama’s operative transformation of the rights of the individual. Obama himself has no conscience towards the constitution he swore an oath to as an Senator to uphold and in announcing his candidacy for President decided to lift up the dress of the Constitution and sodomize it, and in the process my Campaign for President as a legitimately qualified candidate in the same party. Obama didn’t give one ounce of care or have any regret about ramming the Constitution and me into the ground; he still doesn’t, nor do the obots who applaud his efforts of degradation of their own individual rights.

They may not have been impaled on Obama’s pole but their time is coming for sure if he is not removed from office. Perhaps that’s the only justice that will come if Obama remains in office and his illegitimate child Obamacare is allowed to be law inspite of its invalid status. All those businesses and federal employees applauding Obama in his power thrust upon the Constitution is just sickening to me. People might as well be applauding for the rape and sodomy of their own children sold into slavery and the Senator Harry Reid’s explanation and rationalization that the kids were excited about it.

If the Republicans are complicent in refusing to hold an OPEN HEARING on Obama’s ineligibility it should show you very plainly that they are either in on the act, or responsible for selling tickets and funding the pornographic carnival & festival and are so drunk, but not with wine, they can’t see straight.

I sued McCain and Obama which you can see here and here because they were not 'natural born citizens' qualified for the office of the President. I was the only one who ran for President in 2008 and 2012 that did in all of America. I assure you I did it because of 'principle' not popularity.

One of the very central features of my campaign can be articulated in changing the way you see things by taking your blinders off. The way in which you see things is central to your actions upon them. If you continue to see “porno” as the actions of a few porn stars on the internet rather than the actions of the Government against the Constitution, your never going to get well because your looking at the sliver and missing the beam in your own.

If people who are happily married and wonderfully in love continue to point their fingers in judgments against people who are single not seeing for example that by their own definition of “porno” they are starring in a porno every night with their spouse in bed in front of God and that these judgements are perverted with their lack of understanding and wisdom, we are on course for destruction. People have got to stop pointing at what they are pointing at and look behind them to see the devil.

The change can be summed up in the way you look at things by trying very hard to look for the truth in all things rather then looking for the falses. I have tried very hard to look for the truth in all things rather then the falses. That’s probably why you don’t see me in many more fights then you do and why when I do take a stand on a law that has been violated, I take a stand upon the principle and not upon party lines. I sued McCain as well as Obama for not being a natural born citizen qualified for the office of the president, not because it would be popular but because it was based upon the principles of our national security, something the GOP once prided themselves in.

Look at how many people are affected by Obama and his policy of Obamacare and you began to understand that the root of the fraud is based on Obama’s ineligibility in the first place. The good Lord says do you really expect to get the healthy fruit you need from briers and thorny bushes? If you went to the Lord and asked for some bread how would you feel about being handed a stone with the instructions to eat it while he’s holding a loaf of bread in his other hand.

Well, you’d think that was crazy, but it’s a little crazy to understand that the qualification for the President included two full generations void of alien citizenship which is full filled by the requirement of being born in the United States to Citizen parents. To this definition of the qualification there has never been any doubt, and when it comes to our National Security why are our elected leaders vacillating and allowing the doubt to supersede the law?

Indeed we usually say "Can the blind lead the blind?", but in the same context if Congress can't see that having an open hearing on Obama's eligibility can save them in the 2014 elections we could rephrase it as, "Can Congress Lead the Blind?" Actually I can't complain to much as the Republicans and Democrats are right on course to secure and Independent White House in 2016 that will be necessary to keep both parties in more of a constitutional check and balance.

Follow me on Twitter: Official Cody Robert Judy 2016 on Tweeter here

You Can Help Me
[ If you would like to help Cody Robert Judy in his bid for upholding the Constitution in “America’s Birther Campaign”, or ABC Campaign ,which highlights the United States Constitution with information and education for voters to understand the tough questions politicians should be answering in 2014, and in the coming 2016 election for the Office of the President please make a contributions here:

Cody Robert Judy
Get Cody's Book: Taking A Stand

Wednesday, December 4, 2013

Changing Impurities of Principle Prided by Politicians as Popular

Changing Impurities of Principle Prided by Politicians as Popular

A couple of days ago I had the question come into my mind "Why have elected officials all across the Nation, Main Stream Media pundits, and so many businesses and corporation executives taken a stand so hard for Obama and so definitely against the Constitution?"

Its actually hard for me to understand and to see the arguments of delusion when it comes to Obama emphatically not being a natural born citizen and how so many people will in their own defense of him state his mother was an American Citizen so Obama is also, denying in their own statement the fact he is not a "natural born citizen" that requires being "born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents", and also recognizing in their own statement that U.S. Representatives, U.S. Senators and in fact the President's office required being a "Citizen", however only the President's Office required after the Constitution was signed being a 'natural born citizen' as was specified in the grandfather clause of Article I, Sect II, Clause 5.

'..or a 'Citizen' of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution', clearly tells us that after the Constitution was signed two full generations were required for the Office of the President known and understood to be those "Born in the U.S. to Citizen Parents, and clearly our first President George Washington and first Supreme Court Justices of the United States Supreme Court John Jay understood that.

Yet I see time and time again people make the statement that Obama's mother was a "Citizen" so he is too. We're not talking about Obama not being a 'Citizen' for heavens sake, we're talking about him not being a 'natural born citizen' and the differences are notable in the requirements for U.S. Representatives to be "Citizens" and U.S. Senators to be "Citizens" and for those who were "Citizens" before the Constitution was signed this exemption clause was penned into the Constitution.

It's equivalent to the "Bait and Switch" tactic any business would be ridiculed for using? For those not understanding "Bait and Switch" let me sum it up with another word for you "Obamacare". Not only are we seeing the 'bait and switch tactic used in Obama's identification fraud in the way I mentioned but the same tactic is being used for Obama policies. Please consider the text definition of the Bait and Switch from wiki if you will

"Bait-and-switch is a form of fraud used in retail sales but also employed in other contexts. First, customers are "baited" by merchants' advertising products or services at a low price, but when customers visit the store, they discover that the advertised goods are not available, or the customers are pressured by sales people to consider similar, but higher priced items ("switching").

How many personal accounts have you heard about people logging on the Obamacare web site and finding out their insurance was much higher than their previous insurance? How many personal accounts have you heard of about people being 'shocked' at the price of Obamacare after being led down the path by Obama that it would be cheaper then their old insurance? How many personal accounts have you heard about people who were "told" by Obama over and over and over again that they could "keep their doctors", 'they could keep their insurance", and then found out neither of those was true and they would be fined if they didn't sign up for Obamacare and perhaps be imprisoned?

Why would you need to 'criminalize' someone into a plan like Obamacare that is so fabulous? The language states you can be subject of 5 years in prison and a quarter of a million dollars as stated by Representative Peter Roskam R. Ill.

How sad should America be that the Government has intrusively entered into an agreement with their doctors to imprison them and that their IRS Tax Man has now been armed to enforce that? The letter from the JCT includes a list of civil and criminal penalties. These aren’t penalties for not buying insurance, however. They’re penalties for refusing to pay the resulting tax. Barthold’s letter says: Barthold letter, Nov. 5: Depending on the level of the noncompliance, the following penalties could apply to an individual:
Section 7203 – misdemeanor wilful failure to pay is punishable by a fine of up to $25,000 and/or imprisonment of up to one year.
Section 7201 – felony wilful evasion is punishable by a fine of up to $250,000 and/or imprisonment of up to five years.

Its hard for me to fathom my fellow friends in the Democratic Party and the Republican Party's going so far out on a limb from the Constitution as to criminalize people for a choice 'not to get health insurance' and that your own Doctors and Nurses could be brought into a court room to testify against that choice in order to enforce that penalty.

Well, getting back to Obama not being qualified for the Office of the President because he was not 'born in the U.S. to Citizen parents' however which way you'd care to look at it assuring two full generations void of alien citizenship, we must ask the question "Why?" Why have people that we elected and trusted seen such a bait and switch as credible and our own Constitution so unsavory?

In an excruciatingly poignant travesty seen in the case of Allan West who was approached by law enforcement and an elected sheriff we read: The bottom line of that conversation was that West told Zullo (after hearing and acknowledging the evidence of the case) that he couldn't get involved in that because he might have future political aspirations – he couldn't afford to be associated with that. Lt. Zullo assured him this was NOT a birther issue – this was a proven criminal forgery and fabrication of identifying document issue. He assured West that he would be backed up by a full and professional criminal investigation. Lt. Zullo asked West if he could at least help us to open other doors with other VIPS. West reaffirmed that he had no interest in helping us."

"Future Political Aspirations" can you imagine anyone having a future political aspiration who didn't want to uphold the law, who didn't want to take a stand for the Constitution and that the revelation contrary to that would not sink a politicians chances forever in America?

As I pondered the question again, ""Why have elected officials all across the Nation, Main Stream Media pundits, and so many businesses and corporation executives taken a stand so hard for Obama and so definitely against the Constitution?" the answer came to me and that was all summed up in one word "POPULAR".

In order to get elected you have to be "popular" and that takes 'media' and 'people' willing to support you in that 'popularity'. I understand that word very well. I was pretty popular in highschool. I had lots of people who thought well of me and what I did as a highschool running back with a 6.7 yard per carry average.

I sued McCain and Obama which you can see here and here because they were not 'natural born citizens' qualified for the office of the President. I was the only one who ran for President in 2008 and 2012 that did in all of America. I assure you I did it because of 'principle' not popularity.

When 'principle' is trumped by 'popularity' you are on the path of the devils leading to hell. I'm just not sure why politicians who want to lead American want to lead the population on a path to hell? That doesn't make any sense to me.

You know my Mom's got a lymph node in her back that has doubled in size the last thirty days. She's been crying and calling me in agonizing pain. I took her to emergency October 28th and they did a CAT Scan and somehow missed it. The doctor sent her home with pain patches and a chiropractic appointment. She asked him point blank at the emergency center ,"Is there anyway you could have missed something?' He said, ""yes" because what we are very good here at is taking a picture of what's happening "now"." Continuing he said, "What we are not good at is seeing in the big picture what happened in the past, and of course what will happen in the future."

I thought that was a very good answer for what was obviously perplexing all of us. Now here we are some thirty days later and her back doctor does an MRI and see's the lymph node has increased by half its size with the comparisons of the CAT scan used October 28th. Her back Doctor says, "I'm sorry to tell you this but you have an emergency going on and you've got to contact your cancer doctor".

My point is IF Obamacare was understood to be an emergency infecting the body like a cancer and growing at an alarming rate that the doctors or politicians have not identified as an emergency capable of killing us, is it any wonder that the 'bait and switch' that seemingly good men have been fooled with in office now is a sign to you that they are not capable of leading you in 2014?

Shouldn't it be plainly aware to you now, that Obama is not a 'natural born citizen'? How does that apply to 1/6 of the economy of the United States as it relates to Obamacare? Well, if Obama is not a 'natural born citizen' he is certainly not capable of signing legislation passed in the House and Senate into law. Obamacare is indeed not law but is constitutionally invalid?

You know I am urged by the spirit to acknowledge my mother in ways and strengths that you cannot imagine being in a 5'4" frame. She left millions of dollars more then once in her life based on "principles" and against the 'popular' plan or against popular advise, even to what you'd say was the 'hurt' of her children in the small picture.

However, in the larger picture she taught me to take a stand for 'principle' against that which may be popular. While I am in no man's mind perfect I am not ashamed for my actions in many instances standing for 'principle' that wasn't popular. Many have tried to twist and contort even my own stand against my religious leaders as somehow "criminal" and for which I should be ashamed.

Thinking about "principles" verses "popularity" this comes to my mind Isaiah 53:2 King James Version (KJV) v.2 "For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him."

I can tell you with a clear conscience I am not ashamed for taking a stand for 'principles', even though taking a stand for them didn't make me popular and indeed made me infamous. God is my witness and we'd expect him there in a religious meeting. It was in fact impurities of perfection that polluted principles that championed a criminal case against me, and nothing more then the same thing that has thus far kept Obama in the White House avoiding a trial with the evidence that poignantly points to the truth of his not being qualified to sign legislation and of certainly being an invalid in the White House.

If our forefathers of the United States had bent and twisted under the weight of being popular against the constraints of principle this Nation would have never been founded. If nefarious judges rule and corruption has replaced the institution of principle as the pride of our Nation, we shall not be responsible for lifting our future generations up to Heaven, but for dragging them down to hell.

Quite simply, though I know I am not perfect I strive to lift others up, not by lying or twisted baits and clever switches, but with the power of principles instituted in the eternities as the truth that will set us free. I urge all my much more successful political colleagues to consider the power of love to be greater then the power of hate, to consider the power of truth to be greater than the power of the lie, to consider that courage trumps cowardice and I call upon all the Citizenry of this Country to employ the same power and put your shoulder to the wheel in taking a stand with me to urge Congress to consider the principle hearing called for in the demands of justice for all to employ the evidences collected to be be be recorded in the Halls of our Congress regarding the usurpation of the White House by some one who is incompetent, or in other words unqualified, for that office according to U.S.C. Amend 14,Sect 3.

What measure of 'Global Justice' can support the crippling calamity of Usurpation whilst extending the handshake of law and not be seen as hypocritically weak? We here in the United States have a United States Constitution that is the Supreme Law of the Land.

What are your views, standards, and principles and where did they come from?
Follow me on Twitter: Official Cody Robert Judy 2016 on Tweeter here

We are CELEBRATING 90,522 more informed readers here at I want to personally thank you for stopping by!

Breaking News: Bachmann reports House Judiciary Committee meeting discussing over-reach of the White House. Obama is not a King, no man is above the law.

You Can Help Me
[ If you would like to help Cody Robert Judy in his bid for upholding the Constitution in “America’s Birther Campaign”, or ABC Campaign ,which highlights the United States Constitution with information and education for voters to understand the tough questions politicians should be answering in 2014, and in the coming 2016 election for the Office of the President please make a contributions here:

Cody Robert Judy
Get Cody's Book: Taking A Stand

Tuesday, December 3, 2013

Perils and Pitfalls of the New Dating Scene & Debut of New Single "Winter Walk"

She’s Just Not a Keeper- Perils and Pitfalls of the New Dating Scene & Debut of New Single "Winter Walk"

Everyone says “There’s Plenty of Fish in the sea”, like you’re responsible for proving it, you’ve been thrust into the highly cynical singles ocean once again. It’s not like you haven’t tried to avoid it by not doing your share of proposing, (God knows my record shows 3 marriages and 3 divorces), but as with marriage divorces take two people so when one or the other partner calls it quits and your thrown back into the fishing pond, you might thank me for my advice.

Perhaps in the dating world I am now like one of those disgruntled customers at Wallmart returning something that was broken in the packages, or wasn’t to my liking for one reason or the other, but it seems to me there’s a lot more articles in the dating world about “finding Mr. Right” and recognizing his qualities then “Finding Ms. Right” and recognizing hers, which is why I decided to put a few thoughts down on the subject myself.

Ok, first things first “do your own inventory”. If you can dot our “I’s” and cross your own “T’s” as far as representing yourself well on a date meaning: 1)Your actually divorced; 2) You have a job; 3)Your not a psycho by the definition that harangued your X’s ; 4)You’re a gentlemen ; 5) You actually care about something else besides yourself; 6) You’ve showered and straightened yourself up and know how to reasonably dress; 7) You’ve made the effort in getting out; 8) found someone attractive; 9) you’ve actually got that first date behind you now; 10) let’s take a look in your fishing effort at what you actually have on your hook because not everything that wounds up on your hook is a keeper.

Like fishing, dating in your 30’s, 40’s can be very discouraging and while I don’t have any experience in dating in what will be my future decades, I can’t imagine it being much different than my own fishing experiences now -sometimes you get skunked and sometimes you bring home a nice catch. I can only really dish out my advice from my own experiences of which I am an expert and to some degree with my BA in Psychology, am an authority at the very least, to myself.

The Resume

I’ve been single now four years but I really haven’t dated much. Understanding that just getting through a divorce you didn’t actually file counts as “pre-existing condition” you are going to have to explain to your date sooner or later can be as painful as a trip to the Dentist who didn’t quite numb up that nerve under the molar he’s drilling on, as much as you would have appreciated.

It may be a little cliché, but time heals all wounds and when you can go out and speak well of your past, your X spouse, you might be getting close to being good company again. It’s also your right to reasonable expect the same from her. You know dog-gone well, she didn’t marry him because he was a jerk, never spent a dime on her, and was the equivalent of what you’d call “a bad dog”, because you and I both know God didn’t make a bad dog.

Beware of women who want too much of a resume, and don’t feel like you have to give your whole resume. I actually have a biography available at Amazon and Barnes & Noble, and I don’t think I’ve ever gone on a date with a woman who’s actually read it. Not judging someone by their past can be as important as not judging a book by its cover. Keeping painful things light and funny on a first few dates might take you some work, but if your date has turned into a counseling session and she’s in tears over “what was done to her” count it as a sign she needs a lot more of the healing time alone..alone …alone.

She’s a Gold Digger

Its not a stretch to say no one wants to be “liked” just for money., but it’s also not a stretch to say especially as we get older, that her attraction to you may have something to do with your ability to take care of her. I’ve met my share of gold diggers who want to see a 5 year history of tax returns and all your business records.

On the flip side, I’ve approached ladies who thought I was wealthy and seen a real disdain from them caused by a history of their own past marriages from husbands who thought they could buy them or have their way with them based on the fact they wanted “security”.

Of course all that glitters isn’t always gold and that is definitely true with a balance and an appreciation for what you do and what you pay for. Money is said to be the cause of 90% of divorces in one way shape or form, so while you’re paying I’m just saying, look for a balance in her and a genuine appreciation for your hard earned dough.

Paranoia will Destroy Ya

We have to remember that “security” to the female is the number one natural instinct all of her senses are geared around. 60% of all divorces are not filed by women who don’t come out on top or didn’t think it through and imagine how that war was going to be fought anyway before you had a clue.

With the internet dating map at every female fingertip, rest assured your past is not secret. Count on the fact she’s nosed around your past, your social networks, so feel free to do the same. Some guys think that’s taboo for some reason like it’s not fair, not being gentlemen, or being too intrusive. Believe me, when it comes to being ‘nosey’ if we did all we could do we still wouldn’t have mastered that game as she has. You’ve heard it said, “ Alls fair in love and war”, but guys are often still working with one arm tied behind their back when it comes to ‘love’ in the dating scene.
Chances are if she decided to go out with you more than one time she’s either using you as a meal ticket, or she’s actually got past your past and you have a good prospect to reel in.

In the new world of dating I’ve noticed some of the traditional trust has been shattered. Women much more prefer now days to “meet” someone at a restaurant rather than have you pick her up. While that may work for a first couple of meetings, if she keeps up on that you may be dealing with someone who’s so paranoid and delusional about her safety she has ‘trust’ issues that need professional counseling.

If she doesn’t trust herself, her detective skills on the internet, her own instincts when you’ve been a gentlemen obviously you’ve had a couple of successful encounters and conversations, you may have the KGB across from you at the table. Security never loosens up in the marriage it often tightens.

She was so busy looking for Mr. Incredible she forgot to be Incredible.

I recently went out with a gal who I thought was really nice. I was attracted to her and I was kind of trying to figure out where she was at. We’d had 3 dates where I had paid for drinks and nice meals and we both had plenty of time over a month to find out neither one of us was a texting stalker or anything like that.

I received a text from her to some question I’d asked that was interesting and told me a lot about her. She said she’d tried to figure a way to tell me in as short of an answer as she could think of. To answer my question without seeming crass and in a short summation o f her remarks she said she wasn’t just looking for “ordinary” or “ok” , but she was looking for “incredible” and had basically settled herself into being fine with being single until it came along. She was very interested in being taken care of and in someone who was loyal.

Of course who isn’t? The more important thing I begin to ask is, “ Was I “incredible” to her?”; and I came to the conclusion I wasn’t. I’d been on three dates, been a gentleman, paid for everything and she was eager to do more on the premise that she was ‘slow’ or in other words wasn’t a ‘slut’.

I came to the conclusion she was a meal-whore based on the fact that after all we had done together, all the past we had shared of each other’s lives, she had not initiated a single date or invite, never invited me over to cook or invited me to a meal if cooking wasn’t her forte. More than the aforementioned, the biggest factor leading to this conclusion was every engagement of communication was initiated by me. I never once received a single text from her out of the blue or out of that context. That was a big sign to me of hers that read “it’s my way or the highway”, to me.
Indeed it was a “one way road” I was paving for her. In her “quest” for incredible and not mediocre she was indeed forgetting to be anything but incredible by any stretch of the imagination and I finally just got tired of building and working so hard on my side of the road for her.

Sometimes guys are working so hard, paying for everything, opening doors, not expecting sex, and basically making sure the lady knows that you respect her as women so as to impress her that he’s not the “typical jerk” she divorced, they forget to stand still and “wait to be impressed”?

It’s not so nontraditional to cook a meal for a guy or just invite him over for a quiet evening to enjoy his company instead of his wallet. I call this a missing “Wow” feature because if she’s not equally trying to “Wow” you with something more than “make-up”, “hair and nails”, and “clothes” she heaps up as evidence of interest, you’re dealing with gas tank that always takes and doesn’t give much in return.

There are a lot of ‘takers’ in the single world of women, and the ‘giver’s’ are definitely rare. It kind of makes me miss the good ole days of Sati- Hawkins when the girl actually became clever in roping her date but it sure made you know she liked and appreciated you every bit as much as you did her. Marriage is terrible if it is a one way road all the time which is why most successful marriages never quit the courting process and why every time I was married I certainly never gave up on that part of it myself.

BEWARE of Deception

While the ladies might complain fiercely about their not being any “gentlemen” out there anymore, one of the biggest tragedies happening is plain old deception.

The biggest one I’ve found on dating sites is the tragedy of “the old picture”, or “one picture”. I recently arranged a meet n greet with a gal who had a really pretty face and had extended some effort in reaching out. I was suspicious she only had one picture though and my suspicions were confirmed when her admission to a few extra pounds turned out to be a whopping 250 pounds of extra overweight “Yea”!

Another ‘meet n greet’ I went on was incredibly mind blowing as I met my date who was at least 15 years older than her picture and her representation of age. That didn’t bother as much as her dating profile saying she didn’t smoke but witnessing her “stop smoking” program that lasted every 15 minutes.

Of course I could have run from both of these dates at the meeting place, but I chose to just embrace the experience as the bigger person, but I paid for it too. They both had wonderful personalities and I thoroughly enjoyed talking with them like I do any of my friends. The problem is I have friends who have been friends much longer then they had been ‘my friend’ and who are still waiting for me to buy rather than go stag, or Dutch, or whatever you wanna call ‘paying’ for your own meal.

These gals both had it figured out and their best answer to bolting without offering to pay half was, “they’d buy next time”. Of course it’s up to every guy’s own limitations as to how many of those he’ll go through and to what extent he’ll be that part of a “gentleman” that graciously pays for the meal.

Ownership & The Jealous Page

In several instances I’ve found a strange phenomenon taking place in the “dating scene” that is certainly not traditional or what I call the new “ownership” and “jealous page”. This is where the girl takes “ownership” of you after one date. Whatever her justification is the traditional “going out” stage, “getting engaged” stage, and “married stage” has been compressed like a zip disc.

Its quite a strange thing to understand in a women’s mind after one or two dates that your status has risen to the point of “husband” and you didn’t even get a chance to enjoy the ‘dating’ or ‘engagement’ stages of a relationship.
I often find that with these ladies are indeed, “easy come, easy go”, because all they have to do is see you going out with another girl, or posting a picture on your facebook of that “slut”, who you actually would consider inviting ice-skating on a date with her as a friend and she’s filed for divorce and won’t go out with you again.

How in the world will you ever come home from the office again without having bent the secretaries all over the desk, or how will you ever go to the grocery store without having done the bagger behind the meat counter with this lady?
Believe me, insecurity in the best looking women is still their ability to turn into a witch and screw you in ways you’d never dreamt of yet. One would hope that marriage actually meant more to a women then a ‘dog-collar’, but to this kind of a women, its just a tag of ownership rather than a mutual respect of each other’s needs.

There’s a million ways to sniff this out of a women, but once you catch a whiff of it keep in mind that can of “whoop-ass” is something that can bring down half your kingdom faster than the garbage man can pick up and empty trash cans. I’ve seen three of my kingdoms wiped out and the next time I get married it sure as heck won’t be because we plan on their being any reason under the sun that it’s predicated upon, because if there is a reason its predicated upon other then love, there’s a reason for it to come undone and I just as soon sit that marriage out.

In summation I’d like to just touch on a little story that has covered a lot of ground the last few days. Its about a Bishop who dressed up like a ‘Bum’ and had a professional make-up job done so he wasn’t recognized by his own congregation. I laughed a little about many asking him to leave or threatening to call the cops from his own Church.

It kind of reminded me of the story of Mel Dumar who lived just down the street from me as a kid who picked up Howard Hughes as a lowly hitch-hiker. So often today judgments are indeed made simply on the cover of the book, or the quickie news report that takes about one minute to read. Of course we have to make many ‘snap’ judgments in everyday life but rarely do those turn out to be the kind that pays off eternally.

At the risk of sounding again ‘cliché’ , beauty is not always skin deep and actions often speak louder than words. In the singles world what people write about themselves and the pictures they post on the internet, does not always represent the complete picture that is painted in the vibrant personal meeting over dinner, or in the picture God sees of us. Being ‘judged’ as having a bad cover without giving the book a good reading or a chance can lead to the biggest embarrassment of regret as people reflected and in tears recalled in that Church how they had treated that ‘bum’ or what words they had last spoke.

That LDS Bishop who dressed up in front of his own congregation and saw how ugly the superficial skin deep world was definitely received a testimony that beauty wasn’t skin deep and that beauty on the outside didn’t necessarily mean ‘ugly’ on the inside didn’t exist. That should challenge us all as Christians to look into the facts, read the good book, and pray for the understanding not to make decisions that will embarrass us in front of God later on, when the Lord’s disguise is removed and he reveals himself in each and every one of us. Reminds me of asking the Lord in Matt 25: 37-40 “When did we visit you in prison, when did we feed you, when did we give you drink or care for you in sickness?” and the Lord saying, “In as much as you have done it unto the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me”.

Hope you enjoy my newest song Winter Walk.

On a personal Family note: Speaking of Perils and Pitfalls,I'd like to express my gratitude for your prayers as we learned today just about 1pm, that my Mom Ali Judy has just received news that her lymph node in her back has doubled in size the last 30 days. She went through a year of chemo therapy about 2 years ago and has been cancer free but it looks like its back. I'll post more about this later. In the mean time, well, its kind of a sad day for our family and I appreciate so much those who do send their prayers in our behalf. God Bless you and thank you for that.
Cody Robert Judy

Follow me on Twitter: Official Cody Robert Judy 2016 on Tweeter here

You Can Help Me
[ If you would like to help Cody Robert Judy in his bid for upholding the Constitution in “America’s Birther Campaign”, or ABC Campaign ,which highlights the United States Constitution with information and education for voters to understand the tough questions politicians should be answering in 2014, and in the coming 2016 election for the Office of the President please make a contributions here:

Cody Robert Judy
Get Cody's Book: Taking A Stand