image
Gurney's Inn
SpaSoireeTOP
bulletNight Moves
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer

WLNG
Reader Feedback
print email Source: Editorial: Cold Case: Renewed Hunt For Double Murder
Your online message setup
December 09, 2016 | 12:19 PM

DON'T KNOW IF THIS MESSAGE WILL EVER REACH YOU. YOUR SITE KEEPS TELLING ME I ANSWERED THE VERIFICATION QUESTION INCORRECTLY. WELL, THAT'S ONE WAY OF KEEPING THE MESSAGES DOWN.

Steve Schatt
print email Source: Editorial: Cold Case: Renewed Hunt For Double Murder
Rick Murphy: Your anti-Times column
December 09, 2016 | 12:15 PM

Hey, Rick: Welcome to the world of fake news.
Your column that rips the NY Times for bias clearly demonstrates your own. As the old saying goes, you're entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts.
First, the NY Times did not apologize for biased reporting, a canard you repeated in a previous column. You've apparently latched onto your buddy Trump's technique of stating untruths without bothering to do any vetting.
The Times statement specifically said it reported on both sides fairly, but regretted that it failed to appreciate Trump's broad appeal. That's not an apology for bias against Trump but an apology for not reporting on the electorate as thoroughly as it should have. You can disagree with the conclusion that they were fair to both sides, but don't put your words on them.
More Murphy pap: "!the shocking news that The Times made a conscious decision to sabotage Donald Trump's presidential campaign by coloring its coverage of the election." Where did that "news" come from? Your favorite fly on the wall? (More likely from a previous column of yours, wherein you said the Times "acknowledged editors and publishers made a conscious decision to cast Trump in a bad light." Where'd you find that acknowledgement? In a Trump tweet?)
Then you jump on the Trump bandwagon by claiming the Times lost subscribers "in droves" during the campaign. I guess that came from your drunken spy inside the Times circulation department. In fact (remember facts?) the Times reported that they had far more starts than stops during the campaign. And in the week following the election, the paper added 41,000 print and digital subscribers, four times their normal average. In the third (fall) quarter, they added 116,000 digital subscribers.
Now, you can say that those are Times facts, not the real facts. That would be more Trumpspeak. Just deny all, and attribute those "facts" to the lying press.
As for the basic reporting on Trump, the Times consistently did what any good journalist is supposed to do when a candidate says outrageous things (lies and distortions) and doubles down on them: They reported what he said, then reported the truth about his statements.
Did they concentrate on his business and other past dealings? Of course. When a candidate refuses to reveal his taxes, and has no public record to present, what did you expect them to do? Take his word that's he's always been a good boy and a good businessman? Is that your idea of good journalism?
By the way, a couple of weeks ago, Times public editor Liz Spayd wrote noted that ". . . the Times' treatment of Clinton has been the topic of an ongoing media debate, as a wide array of writers have detailed what they viewed as the paper's patently unfair treatment of the Democratic nominee. Even the Times's former executive editor, Jill Abramson, agreed that the newspaper gives Clinton "˜an unfair' level of scrutiny." She was hardly alone this campaign, as numerous media observers and readers alike criticized the paper's treatment of the Democratic nominee . . . "
So while you and your Trump buddies have dumped on the Times for anti-Trump bias, others have dumped on the times for anti-Clinton bias. Usually that sort of thing means the paper is doing something right.
But I digress. Let's get back to your own biased conclusions. So sorry uncomfortable facts keep popping up about your assertions. That innocent call from the Taiwan president? Turns out that it wasn't just a casual thing ("Hello, who is this?") but a setup by Bob Dole, lobbyist for Taiwan -- an activity that Trump would supposedly bar if he had his way. But no problem now.
I was going to end it here, but there are so many unsubstantiated items in your column that I might as well throw in one or two more. Re Dean Baquet: "!Maybe Baquet was more pliable." Oh, yes. And maybe Donald Trump kills puppies. "Baquet should have resigned when this disgraceful episode began. He is finished in this business." So you leap to an inaccurate conclusion about the Times's "apology," and then you fire for life a Pulitzer-prize-winning journalist and former DC bureau chief who just might know a bit more about the news biz than you do. By the way, the guy resigned from his job as editor of the LA Times because he refused an order to cut staff.
And what have you contributed to the journalism biz, besides backing your "rude and obnoxious" guy (your words) for the most powerful position in the world? You worked at the Times, as an East End reporter. I'd love to know what major awards you won, what scandals you exposed. And you gave up working at the "gold standard" of the industry because of the bias you found? And you now love working at a newspaper with a conservative bias, whose owner made his millions with clever slogans and product exaggerations in the wonderful world of advertising. A perfect model for your brand of journalism.
Yes, there's a general belief that most newspapers have a liberal bias. It might be true, if you're talking about the political bent of reporters and editors. That doesn't necessarily translate into slanting the news, but that perception has certainly been exacerbated by Fox and other conservative operations (with their own biases) pounding away at it. Say "liberal bias" often enough and even liberals start to believe it. Sort of like Donald Trump talking about the lying media again and again and undermining a general belief in the essential role of the press. Ask any Trump supporter what he thinks of you and the rest of the press and you'll likely see a raised fist -- as we've all seen at his rallies when Trump points to the reporters.
Every newspaper reporter and editor has biases. If there are more liberal news people out there than conservatives, it might be because the left-leaning are more likely to be interested in the problems of the disenfranchised or the sins of officials -- two of the bedrock concerns of the free press. The nature of journalism is a quest for info about the negatives as well as the positives of society. Do young conservatives have the drive to pursue that goal at the lowest levels of the newspaper chain? I don't know. But how else do you explain so many "liberal" reporters at papers in the heartland of the country?
In any case, the good reporters and editors can put their biases aside in their reporting and presentation. No one is perfect, but top papers like the Times, the Washington Post, and the LA Times hit the mark far more often than not. Where else would you, the campaigns and even much of the cable and internet media get your initial news from? Incidentally, most newspapers across the country are owned by Republicans or conservatives, despite the perceived liberal bias. And a half-dozen conglomerates (certainly not liberal) own the bulk of other media outlets.
You may be a newspaper nut, but it's clear why you're now a big fish in the little pond of a Hamptons weekly. It gives you free rein to spout your views, but your own biases have overshadowed your appreciation for facts. A good columnist, even for a local weekly, bases his or her opinions on vetted info. Try that sometime.

(P.S.This is a personal message, not a "letter to the editor." Not interested in enlightening anyone but you.)

Steve Schatt (sschatt@aol.com)
print email Source: Editorial: Cold Case: Renewed Hunt For Double Murder
Your anti-Times column
December 09, 2016 | 12:09 PM

Hey, Rick: Welcome to the world of fake news.
Your column that rips the NY Times for bias clearly demonstrates your own. As the old saying goes, you're entitled to your opinion, but not your own facts.
First, the NY Times did not apologize for biased reporting, a canard you repeated in a previous column. You've apparently latched onto your buddy Trump's technique of stating untruths without bothering to do any vetting.
The Times statement specifically said it reported on both sides fairly, but regretted that it failed to appreciate Trump's broad appeal. That's not an apology for bias against Trump but an apology for not reporting on the electorate as thoroughly as it should have. You can disagree with the conclusion that they were fair to both sides, but don't put your words on them.
More Murphy pap: "!the shocking news that The Times made a conscious decision to sabotage Donald Trump's presidential campaign by coloring its coverage of the election." Where did that "news" come from? Your favorite fly on the wall? (More likely from a previous column of yours, wherein you said the Times "acknowledged editors and publishers made a conscious decision to cast Trump in a bad light." Where'd you find that acknowledgement? In a Trump tweet?)
Then you jump on the Trump bandwagon by claiming the Times lost subscribers "in droves" during the campaign. I guess that came from your drunken spy inside the Times circulation department. In fact (remember facts?) the Times reported that they had far more starts than stops during the campaign. And in the week following the election, the paper added 41,000 print and digital subscribers, four times their normal average. In the third (fall) quarter, they added 116,000 digital subscribers.
Now, you can say that those are Times facts, not the real facts. That would be more Trumpspeak. Just deny all, and attribute those "facts" to the lying press.
As for the basic reporting on Trump, the Times consistently did what any good journalist is supposed to do when a candidate says outrageous things (lies and distortions) and doubles down on them: They reported what he said, then reported the truth about his statements.
Did they concentrate on his business and other past dealings? Of course. When a candidate refuses to reveal his taxes, and has no public record to present, what did you expect them to do? Take his word that's he's always been a good boy and a good businessman? Is that your idea of good journalism?
By the way, a couple of weeks ago, Times public editor Liz Spayd wrote noted that ". . . the Times' treatment of Clinton has been the topic of an ongoing media debate, as a wide array of writers have detailed what they viewed as the paper's patently unfair treatment of the Democratic nominee. Even the Times's former executive editor, Jill Abramson, agreed that the newspaper gives Clinton "˜an unfair' level of scrutiny." She was hardly alone this campaign, as numerous media observers and readers alike criticized the paper's treatment of the Democratic nominee . . . "
So while you and your Trump buddies have dumped on the Times for anti-Trump bias, others have dumped on the times for anti-Clinton bias. Usually that sort of thing means the paper is doing something right.
But I digress. Let's get back to your own biased conclusions. So sorry uncomfortable facts keep popping up about your assertions. That innocent call from the Taiwan president? Turns out that it wasn't just a casual thing ("Hello, who is this?") but a setup by Bob Dole, lobbyist for Taiwan -- an activity that Trump would supposedly bar if he had his way. But no problem now.
I was going to end it here, but there are so many unsubstantiated items in your column that I might as well throw in one or two more. Re Dean Baquet: "!Maybe Baquet was more pliable." Oh, yes. And maybe Donald Trump kills puppies. "Baquet should have resigned when this disgraceful episode began. He is finished in this business." So you leap to an inaccurate conclusion about the Times's "apology," and then you fire for life a Pulitzer-prize-winning journalist and former DC bureau chief who just might know a bit more about the news biz than you do. By the way, the guy resigned from his job as editor of the LA Times because he refused an order to cut staff.
And what have you contributed to the journalism biz, besides backing your "rude and obnoxious" guy (your words) for the most powerful position in the world? You worked at the Times, as an East End reporter. I'd love to know what major awards you won, what scandals you exposed. And you gave up working at the "gold standard" of the industry because of the bias you found? And you now love working at a newspaper with a conservative bias, whose owner made his millions with clever slogans and product exaggerations in the wonderful world of advertising. A perfect model for your brand of journalism.
Yes, there's a general belief that most newspapers have a liberal bias. It might be true, if you're talking about the political bent of reporters and editors. That doesn't necessarily translate into slanting the news, but that perception has certainly been exacerbated by Fox and other conservative operations (with their own biases) pounding away at it. Say "liberal bias" often enough and even liberals start to believe it. Sort of like Donald Trump talking about the lying media again and again and undermining a general belief in the essential role of the press. Ask any Trump supporter what he thinks of you and the rest of the press and you'll likely see a raised fist -- as we've all seen at his rallies when Trump points to the reporters.
Every newspaper reporter and editor has biases. If there are more liberal news people out there than conservatives, it might be because the left-leaning are more likely to be interested in the problems of the disenfranchised or the sins of officials -- two of the bedrock concerns of the free press. The nature of journalism is a quest for info about the negatives as well as the positives of society. Do young conservatives have the drive to pursue that goal at the lowest levels of the newspaper chain? I don't know. But how else do you explain so many "liberal" reporters at papers in the heartland of the country?
In any case, the good reporters and editors can put their biases aside in their reporting and presentation. No one is perfect, but top papers like the Times, the Washington Post, and the LA Times hit the mark far more often than not. Where else would you, the campaigns and even much of the cable and internet media get your initial news from? Incidentally, most newspapers across the country are owned by Republicans or conservatives, despite the perceived liberal bias. And a half-dozen conglomerates (certainly not liberal) own the bulk of other media outlets.
You may be a newspaper nut, but it's clear why you're now a big fish in the little pond of a Hamptons weekly. It gives you free rein to spout your views, but your own biases have overshadowed your appreciation for facts. A good columnist, even for a local weekly, bases his or her opinions on vetted info. Try that sometime.

(P.S. This is a personal message, not a "letter to the editor." Not interested in enlightening anyone but you.

Steve Schatt (sschatt@aol.com)
print email Source: Editorial: A LITTLE OF THIS AND A LITTLE OF THAT
Clothes Make the Man
December 07, 2016 | 08:32 AM

I totally agree with Garrison Keillor .. Trump needs a more Presidential "do". Might add that he also should get some new and more Presidential "threads" at Paul Stewart.

Bill Crandall
print email Source: Editorial: Mobile Home Owners Fighting Back
holiday travel park holiday fl.
December 05, 2016 | 07:19 PM

all of these comments cant be far off base, if kingsley corp I truly hope they do not buy holiday travel, the people here need protection not more drug problems. how can they deny the case in co. he entire park, here knows the history of the kingsley/ galland co. there are buyers lined up for this park, think twice if even a third of this is true, we don't need you, our legal system here, works much faster, the retired people run, fl. watching!!!!!

cathy clark
print email Source: Editorial: Shaping The Heart Of Hampton Bays
letter to the editor
December 04, 2016 | 01:56 PM

I just tried to submit a letter to the editor but have received a Notice from The Independent's Delivery System that Delivery appears to have failed.

Is The Independent having a system problem?
Susan Cerwinski

sccerwins@gmail.com
print email Source: Editorial: MISS RHEINGOLD . . . YOU MUST REMEMBER THIS
December 03, 2016 | 01:29 PM

Jerry,
Beautifully remembered!
It was a different time. Life was different. In 1948 my father was about to sell his '31 Model A Ford. He bought it in '41 when it was 10 years old. He had his eye on a 1938 Pontiac...dark green...it, too, was 10 years old. Public transportation was a trolley car...went right up the middle of Jackson Avenue all the way to Hoboken for a nickle. On every single block there was a candy store. That's where the neighborhood folks bet on "the numbers" and the horses. The dimes and quarters were picked up a couple times a day by a skinny nervous guy called Benny the Bookie. He wasn't the bookie. He was just the "runner" The bookie was a guy called Chester who was partners with Harry, a family friend whose son became a doctor. Meanwhile, time is getting shorter...and so am I.

al
print email Source: Editorial: MISS RHEINGOLD . . . YOU MUST REMEMBER THIS
True Confessions
November 30, 2016 | 02:03 AM

Jerry ! The best line in this whole story is at the end when Father Cafero asked you, "Which one?' Took me right back to when I was 14; standing on the confessional line with 20 other people from my neighborhood at St. Joseph's Church in Hewlett (as my Mother made me do every Saturday afternoon); and trying to think stuff up while waiting on line that I could confess. Was never easy because I was only a kid, so I made up the usual kid stuff ! Lied 6 times to my Mother; took The Lord's "Name in Vain" 10 times; had impure thoughts about 20 times (and all in one week). And then for my penance ! Say 5 "Our Fathers", 10 "Hail Mary's", and light a candle (10 cents) for the "Conversion of Russia". Easy peasy!
But then one Saturday, and the last time I EVER went to confession, I told Father Halperin that I felt-up Mary Jane (VERY well-developed at 14 herself) in the Church basement. My first shot at "2nd base". Next thing I knew ! a hand reached into the sanctuary of my private little curtained booth and yanked me out in front of EVERYONE waiting on line. It was Father Halperin (every kid's worst nightmare in the Parish.) Who immediately began to yell, berate, and embarrass the living shit out of me. I laugh about it now, but that was the very day I quit the R.C. Church - .and all organized and branded religions. And it's been great fun ever since. LOL ! Bill


Bill Crandall
print email Source: Editorial: BE THANKFUL. IT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE.
November 24, 2016 | 03:39 PM

Dear Jerry,

Don't worry...everything will be okay!

I look forward to seeing you on Cavuto.
Go to confession first.

al

Al
print email Source: Editorial: BE THANKFUL. IT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE.
Pick Your Poison
November 23, 2016 | 10:44 PM

Dear commentator Louanne Lang ... Hard for people to know the "truth" if they don't even bother to look for it. Only watch FOX and you get their version; only watch MSNBC and you get their's. And maybe, if you're lucky, maybe some "hard" facts and news instead of opinions in between (let's say CNN.) Or, for those who actually read, maybe the NYT, WSJ, Washington Post or Times, et al. Pick your poison!

Bill Crandall
print email Source: Editorial: BE THANKFUL. IT COULD HAVE BEEN WORSE.
Comment
November 23, 2016 | 07:03 PM

Democracy - it really is great. However retiring Supreme Court Judge Sutur said that it's best when our electorate is informed. It is not. And, Jerry - I think that is the problem with our country today. We are not "truthfully" informed.
Just sayin'

Louanne Lang
print email Source: Editorial: TEARS AND JEERS
Things Are Looking Up
November 15, 2016 | 10:45 PM

Even having supported Clinton and being greatly disappointed in her loss, I am now, somehow, cautiously optimistic about Trump since announcing Reince Priebus as his Chief of Staff. Yet, Trump choosing Steve Bannon as his Senior Strategic Advisor is somewhat bewildering. And rumors of Bolton for Secretary of State simply scare the shit out of me. But let's wait and see what The Donald does before discounting his POTUS victory. Ryan just got re-elected as House Speaker; Sessions is up for some major Cabinet post (maybe Attorney General or Secretary of State); and Schumer will become Senate Minority leader. All major minds and experienced "Establishment" politicos, who put "America First" and Party second; and want to get things done for all people. That is very encouraging! At the same time, there is also talk of Giuliani for something. Director of Homeland Security makes good sense to me, but that's about it. After that and LOL, perhaps Ambassador to Burundi. That said and however things unfold, the truly good news about Trump is that he picked Mike Pence as his Veep and new head of the transition team. A highly experienced Governor and true voice-of-reason. And finally, for the all-important post of U.S. Secretary of Defense, Trump should keep Ash Carter ! because this no time for "rookies" regarding National defense and global military initiatives.

Bill Crandall
print email Source: Editorial: FATHER OF THE BRIDE
November 11, 2016 | 05:44 PM

Jerry...

It's going to be better than writing a column.

Congratulations to you and Judy!

All good things!!!

And, yes Judy...I shudda hired you 40 years ago!

al

Al
print email Source: Editorial: FATHER OF THE BRIDE
Blessings on your Daughter's wedding day
November 10, 2016 | 10:49 PM

Don Della Femina Blessings on your daughter's wedding. May her first child be a masculine child, I am going to leave you now, Don Della Femina because I know you are busy, but I want to thank you for letting me honor this very important day, your daughter's wedding day.

Karl (Carlo Brazzi )
print email Source: Editorial: FATHER OF THE BRIDE
Father of the Bride
November 08, 2016 | 07:07 PM

First and foremost Jerry ! Congrats to you and Jessie on her wedding this Saturday. And no worries about shedding any tears "" you'll be just fine. Not your first trip walking a daughter down the aisle. The hard part, of course, will be when you and Jessie dance the classic father/daughter dance together; hold each other; look right into each other's eyes, and share some private words together. That's where I broke down a bit when my girls, Jessica and Sara, were married. So keep two clean handkerchiefs in your pocket. One for you and one for Jessie. And best to all for a happy, wonderful, and fun day.

Meanwhile, thanks for the great Boot, Friedman, and WSJ posts on today's election. Couldn't have summed it up better myself. Bill


Bill Crandall
print email Source: Editorial: Voters Asked To Divert CPF For Clean Water Projects
NO TO PROP 1
November 06, 2016 | 04:07 PM

Take the 20 %, define the projects,demonstrate knowledge of the issues and 13 years from now vote for an extension of time.
Plenty of time to define the projects.
13 years.

jpkaroussoss
print email Source: Editorial: I’M SO CONFUSED
Very Jerry
November 04, 2016 | 01:50 AM

The thing about all of you earlier naysaying "Jerry's Ink" commentators is that you still don't get Jerry. Yes, a die-hard Republican who loves his money (and don't we all), but an American patriot first and foremost. And when he sees total bullshit, he calls it, in his fashion and whether one likes it or not, the way he sees it. And who would expect anything less from him?

Bill Crandall
print email Source: Editorial: I’M SO CONFUSED
November 03, 2016 | 04:27 PM

Dear Jerry,

I loved your Cars-for-Kids bit! I laughed! Good one! But then you kept on going. Why?!

Didn't your mama teach you there's a time to shut up?

Jerry, shush. enough. No more Trump. No more Clinton.

Agita!

Love,

Al


al
print email Source: Editorial: I’M SO CONFUSED
trump a liar
November 03, 2016 | 12:42 PM

This is a joke right?
He might stretch the point but he is not a Hillary like liar.
WE know Hillary.I don't think she knows anything about ethics or truth.
Left the WH poor and she is a millionaire by selling access to her offfice and the WH.
She is truly ready to extend Obamas
bull..t.

jpkaroussos
print email Source: Editorial: I’M SO CONFUSED
Trump
November 02, 2016 | 06:19 PM

Jerry, just wondering what Trump did to you to make you support Clinton. Maybe it's time to leave the Hamptons because now you really fit in. I am not a fan of Trump but nothing can be worse than what we have. Clinton is way more dangerous. Like the rest of traditional Republicans you are not respecting the voters. It is nice to see the apple cart uplifting they don't want the system to change. You really disappointed me, I was a big fan. Avenue U will not be the same. Best Regards. Frank from Coney Island and X.

Frank Martino
print email Source: Editorial: MY DINNER WITH "DIMAGG"
October 26, 2016 | 01:17 PM

Jerry,

Wonderful!!!!!

From now on, I will cook mushy pasta!

al

Al
print email Source: Editorial: HOW I STARTED A WAR
Ugh
October 22, 2016 | 12:05 PM

Like most of his supporters I will give Donald Trump a pass on a lot of bad behavior because of Hilary's extreme corruption and because I hate the idea of the public being brainwashed by the media. However, I just can't get over his speech at the Al Smith dinner and I don't know if I can forgive him for that complete lack of humor. How un-funny can one person be???

Elisa Forgione
print email Source: Editorial: HOW I STARTED A WAR
How I started a war
October 19, 2016 | 01:09 PM

I would like to be your Facebook friend again.

David Enock
print email Source: Editorial
two untrustworthy candidates
October 19, 2016 | 11:20 AM

She stole the WH china.
Lost her Rose Law firm records only to be found in her bedroom.
Tried but thankfully failed to pass a single payer national insurance program.
Did nothing for NY state as a senator
Did nothing for our foreign relations as secretary of state.
Verbally abused the women that her husband raped.
Lied about her emails and her stupidity got 4 good Americans killed in Bengazi.
TRUMP CAN'T BE ALL THAT BAD.


jpkaroussos
print email Source: Editorial: HOW I STARTED A WAR
America First. Then Party
October 19, 2016 | 02:17 AM

My dear Jerry ! I'm very proud of you and to be your friend for a lot of reasons. But the best yet is your support of Hillary Clinton. I know it won't be easy for you as a life-long Republican to vote for her on 11/8, any more than it was for me as a life-long Democrat to have voted for Reagan against my beloved Jimmy Carter in "˜80. But we do what we have to do for the good of our COUNTRY ! not Party. That is my definition of patriotism. XOXO, Bill

Bill Crandall
print email Source: Editorial: HOW I STARTED A WAR
you
October 18, 2016 | 04:13 PM

so right jerry
loved this story

mike

tesch
print email Source: Editorial: HOW I STARTED A WAR
you
October 18, 2016 | 04:11 PM

so right jerry

mike

mike tesch
print email Source: Editorial: HOW I STARTED A WAR
Trump For President
October 18, 2016 | 03:51 PM

I respectfully differ with Jerry on Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton. She has clearly shown the world that she is above the law (in her mind) and has treated USA like a third world nation in accepting "bribes" for favors and violating many laws. If she were POTUS she could do severe damage including unworthy selections of Justices for the US Supreme Court. He is a wealthy and successful non-politician with nothing to gain other than the respect and admiration of the citizens of America.

Emil Braun
print email Source: Editorial: CONFESSIONS OF A CLUMSY OAF
Funny and Frustrating Airline Ticketing Story
October 16, 2016 | 11:12 AM

Several years ago when I used to enjoy flying for business I went to the ticket counter and spoke at length to a very nice and attractive ticketing agent. After an informative talk updating me on recent airline rules and regs, the unfortunate happened, I dropped my ticket between the ticket structure and her computer. Her good mood faded quickly as we both tried to find that very thin piece of ticket paper that evidently disappeared in ticket black hole a no man's land between space and the recesses of the ticket ledge space where there was no bottom. She looked, I pointed it went there oh maybe there or check out here, to no avail and she even looked throughout the cabinent area, As she stood up front face flushed red with frustration and annoyance fully in my direction, I knew my charm was not going to work in this instance. I begged for another ticket copy and realized this would not be a memorable memory for her hopefully forgetful with time I walked and ran as speedily from the counter with copy of ticket in hand probably being mistaken for the commercial where the man runs through the airport for his rental rivaling the speed of light. Next I take the train or better yet drive.

Karl
print email Source: Editorial: CONFESSIONS OF A CLUMSY OAF
Confessions of a Stupid Young Man
October 12, 2016 | 05:29 AM

Great story Jerry ! And since I don't want to be accused of "hijacking" your post, I'll just say this ! On a flight from LAX to JFK in 1985, I found myself sitting in a First Class two-seater AA "Red Eye" next to a very well dressed and good looking woman with a fish bowl and two Goldfish in it on the floor. I was 35 and she was at least 50 (probably 60). She flirted with me quite a bit and, given my long-standing "older woman" fantasy, I took the bait. An hour into our flight, she accidentally kicked the fish bowl over on the floor; the fish were flopping around; she went nuts; and caused quite a scene. Fast-forward to JFK ! I offered her a ride in my agency's reserved Town Car back to Manhattan and the next thing I knew, we were at her place on East 64th Street at 5:30 A.M., and on a "School Day" for work. Needless to say, I never made it to the office. And it was great, up to a point. But altogether I must say, "Be careful what you wish for." And oh so sadly now, my fantasy "older woman" has no teeth and uses a walker. LOL ! Bill

Bill Crandall

WLNG
Hardy Plumbing
SpaSoireeTOP