Honey, why must you be so negative?

[The Judge]

I really think we need to have a serious talk about your attitude. I just don’t understand why you insist on being so negative all the time. I mean, take this “Petition for Divorce” that you just sent me. It’s oozing with negativity from page one. Hell, look at the way it starts:

"1. By and through this petition, Petitioner BRENDA ECKHARDT, an adult citizen of Essex County, seeks a divorce and a permanent order of protection against Respondent DENNIS J. ECKHARDT, on the grounds of adultery, physical abuse, bigamy, public humiliation, animal cruelty, and attempted murder.”

You see, right from the get-go you focus on all the bad stuff. It’s like you want everyone who reads this to think I some kind of scary guy. But we both know there’s a lot more to me than banging babysitters and clocking you in the face.

I mean, come on now, honey – bigamy? We’ve been over that one like a gazillion times. You know I never considered Lisa to be a regular wife. I only married her because she was pregnant, and I remembered how bad you felt for your friend Tina when her husband had a kid with that woman from his job. You kept saying that you couldn’t imagine “the shame” of having a husband who had an illegitimate child – I only married Lisa to spare you that shame! But now you and this lawyer of yours are trying to turn it around into something negative. I’d be lying if I said I wasn’t a little hurt by that.

And then there’s the part in paragraphs 32 and 33 about your supposed “public humiliation”:

“32. On or about July 17, 2003, after a night of binge drinking, respondent DENNIS J. ECKHARDT returned home with several intoxicated friends. With the help of at least two of these friends, Respondent attempted to create a videotape showing Respondent flatulating in Petitioner’s face while she slept.

“33. However, Respondent apparently misjudged the fullness of his lower intestine and sprayed several pieces of fecal matter onto the face and neck of Petitioner. Respondent later uploaded a video clip of this incident onto an Internet web site entitled www.shitsandgiggles.com. As of the date of this Petition, said video clip was still available for viewing by the public.”

Now you know that’s not the whole story. You didn’t mention the two hundred bucks that the website paid us for the video, and how at least three of those dollars were spent on those tampons you supposedly “needed” (even though we had several rolls of paper towels at home). But I guess those details didn’t fit too well in this little hatchet job of yours, huh? I guess you’re just committed to seeing the glass as half-empty.

Why else would you call what happened with Pebbles “animal cruelty”? I mean, yes, I guess it’s technically true that I “utilized Petitioner’s pet dog to remove semen from the chest of a woman with whom Respondent had engaged in sexual intercourse.” And yes, “that adulterous encounter occurred in the bed that Respondent shared with Petitioner – while Petitioner was in the hospital receiving treatment for the genital herpes transmitted to her by Respondent.”

But, come on – let’s be fair about this. First of all, I only spunked on her rack because I didn’t want to knock her up and have you end up like Tina (see above). So once again, my actions were motivated by my respect for you. And once I blew my load I couldn’t just leave it on her – that would have been disrespectful to the sanctity of our home! I had to wipe it off her, and the only two things available were Pebbles and your nightgown – and I know how much you love that nightgown.

So if you want to focus on the downside, go ahead and call my using your dog as a cum rag “animal cruelty”. But I – and most normal people who don’t look at life through shit-colored glasses – call it “respecting my wife and respecting her favorite nightgown.” (And honestly, honey, did you really need to italicize the part about me giving you genital herpes? I mean, you took the Valtrex and it cleared up pretty good. Can’t we just move on?).

Finally, there’s this part at the end about how “on or about September 19, 2004, Respondent became severely intoxicated after losing a football bet. In his drunken stupor, Respondent mistook Petitioner for placekicker Sebastian Janikowski of the Oakland Raiders, who earlier in the day had missed a 37-yard field goal attempt that resulted in the Raiders’ failure to cover the spread.

“64. Enraged by the loss of his $300 wager, Respondent forced Petitioner to remove all her clothes and then proceeded to spray-paint Janikowski’s jersey number (11) onto Petitioner’s naked torso. Respondent then forced Petitioner – at gunpoint – to stand in front of the couple’s garage door during a hailstorm while Respondent placed logs of firewood on a tee and kicked them at Petitioner as he shouted, ‘Take that, you fat Polack!’”

“65. Angered by his inability to hit Petitioner with any of the logs, Respondent then discharged his firearm several times in Petitioner’s direction. After emptying the ammunition cartridge of his gun, Respondent hurled the weapon towards Petitioner and collapsed on the ground.”

Alright, I suppose you got me on that one.

But the rest of this thing is just so unfair. For the sake of your own happiness, I really think you need to start looking at the bright side of life and stop playing the blame game.

Maybe when you stop being Polly Pessimist, you’ll be able to see things as they really are -- and maybe then you’ll realize that everything that went wrong in our marriage was your fault.

[cman]

damn judge....first your going after cops...now you did this to your wife?

Your a bad man....your my hero....but still a bad man

wde

[Romanowski]

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2yWTZWtE2yM

[Jahred]

Originally Posted by Romanowski

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2yWTZWtE2yM