Given her attrocious online grammar, I wouldn't put too much stock in this wording. Also, when people have to deal with an unexpected negative event, they don't always think straight.
It struck me as odd because people tend to naturally rank items or events when they're giving information; they don't just put them in any odd order (unless they're trying to deceive you). And they don't even think about it; they just do it. It's a totally unconscious process, and has nothing to do with literacy or intelligence.
Sometimes people will rank upward from lowest to highest importance if they've got exciting, happy news. That can also be done intentionally, as a means of building excitement or buffering the effect of a piece of bad news. But under stress, they'll always spontaneously rank downward from most important thing to least important. And, as I said, they're not even thinking about it; it's just a natural impulse to get the most important info out first.
Another interesting thing about that particular tweet: she refers to the car as "my car," not "our car." They've been married for 10 years, share everything, and only have one car—which she's previously referred to as "our car." But now all of a sudden it's
her car—he's been cut out of the picture. Also, Josh doesn't even get named; he's just "my husband," which wouldn't seem like distancing language if he was ranked first and she referred to a shared car, but here? Yeah, it is.
So here's my take on that tweet: Polissa's most concerned about the car being in impound right now, because they really need it, especially if Josh is going to keep his job, and she can't possibly afford to get it out.
Josh is of secondary importance to her (if only for the moment). That he is tells me he's unharmed, and will be getting out of jail tomorrow (he probably won't even have to post bail). My guess is he got hauled in simply for having no license and no insurance. If things were looking really bad for him, with more serious charges, and he was going to stay locked up for a while, he'd be of primary importance to her—but he's not.
That said, she's absolutely
pissed at him for wrecking the car, getting arrested, and the car getting impounded. They've just suffered a catastrophe, and it's all his damned fault.
Polissa always needs somebody else to blame for her troubles, and this time it's Josh who is catching all of it. She can't keep blaming Josh because she needs him, and because her ego won't let her admit she married an idiot. But until she can start generating excuses for him, and finds other things to point the finger of blame at, he's in the doghouse (so it's just as well he's in jail).
And Polissa? She's not to blame at all, because she's less than a week post-op, and couldn't possibly have driven her husband to and from work.
[Yes, overthinking shit is my specialty.]
I'd like to believe most of us alleged cellar-dwellers are reasonable people that know how to be responsible adults and drive a car only if we're properly licensed and the vehicle is properly registered and insured. Polissa feels rules shouldn't apply to her or her household, so the cavalier attitude is unsurprising and the consequences are about to hit them hard in the next 24 hours or so.
Polissa has the weird relationship to rules and laws that all Narcissists do. Basically, they're for other people. Polissa herself (and, by extension, Josh) has too many unique mitigating circumstances to be expected to follow them. But when she does follow them, she expects to be rewarded—doing everything she is supposed to means she ought to get everything she wants in return.
I'm not going to gloat. That said, it's the ultimate example of poor decision-making leading to a bad situation with serious consequences. Already, Polissa seems ready to blame everyone and everything but Josh for his decision to drive without a license and find himself involved in an accident. She's already blaming the brakes; inb4 she starts blaming the cousin who "gave" her the car.
Yes, yes; absolutely.
I'm not sure how based Alabama is, but around here, the activist types and ACLU folks are slowly bullying persuading courts out of assessing large fines to poor people or sentencing them to jail if they can't afford said fines because they deem it an undesirable practice that should be discontinued.
It's expensive to house people in jail, and just not worth it for a lot of nonviolent offenders—Josh included. He's probably going to lose his job now that the car's been impounded; he hasn't even been charged with anything yet, but the punishment's already brutal.
He's poor as shit, and barely literate, with anger issues, but he can get, and maybe even hold, a job—how would going to jail make him any better a citizen than he is right now? How would it make him straighten up and fly right, when he's going to be even poorer, no more literate, and a whole lot angrier when he gets out? It'd be more humane and productive to have him pick up litter alongside the highway one morning a week for a few months, so he can remain employed, and housed, and look after his crazy disabled wife.
I don't like the guy, but his life is already shit, and making it shittier by a couple of orders of magnitude isn't going to solve anything.
