Sunday, May 31, 2009
Obviously, for someone to kill the man doesn't do our cause much good. Sadly, had the gunman stepped up, turned himself in, he may have been found not guilty under the Kansas court system that found Tiller himself not guilty of killing babies outside the law and restrictions of Kansas. I mean when they let one killer get away they would probably allow another killer get away as well.
On the news one church attendant said she was shocked that this kind of "evil" could happen in that area. I wonder if she knew what Tiller did every day? I mean talk about evil. He didn't help women, he aided and abetted rape, incest, and familial rule over women's bodies the so called feminists deplore. All this done in his Temple to the god of Choice and Money.
He should not have died at the hands of a cowardly gunman. He should have faced human justice for killing the thousands of babies he has in his abortuary. Instead he now faces his Creator Who will demand justice, not mercy, since Tiller showed no mercy to the babies he slaughtered. May God have mercy on his soul.
Friday, May 29, 2009
See, once upon a time, health insurance paid for medically necessary treatments in order to save a life or whatnot but not much else. Then the benevolent government came into businesses and demanded more with group health care and certain rules and regulations about what is to be paid for with that group plan. Then the benevolent government said to the employers not only will you offer it but you have to cover at least 50% of the employee's portion if you offer it. Everybody will have relatively the same coverage with deductibles etc.
Also, government forced insurance companies to basically do away with pre-existing conditions and in some sense this was wise though very costly. Really some situations should be covered even though it was pre-existing. The costs though to the insurance companies have been passed down to the insured through the premiums because it is all included in an actuarial table and the cost of doing business.
At the same time there was a move to leave paying for the medical treatment only, adding higher percentages being paid for well visits. Then there was a move to lower the cost of normal doctor visits so everybody could go for the smallest thing like a cold. Behind all that was a push to normalize costs and payments to doctors for services because medicare was being charged different charges for services than people with no insurance or limited coverage. So now doctors have to agree to charge a specific fee with certain insurance companies based on what medicare allows and pays.
Now generally speaking these were not terrible ideas being thrown out until you look at the group health plans that employers must pay 50% to offer employees. See every health care plan or group insurance plan must cover drug and alcohol abuse, payment for pregnancy, and other mandatory services that cost the insured and company when it may never be used or needed.
For example a group plan with two employees (which is very hypothetical because it requires more than 2 employees for group), one is married male 60 years old and wife is also 60 the other is 20 something non-married female. The coverage is the very same even though the needs are totally different. The 20 something female if taking the coverage will pay more for coverage than what she would actually use. The 60 year old may have a better deal when looking at cost verses usage, but he is having to pay for pregnancy coverage for he and his wife when that is not something they will use.
Both have to pay for the opportunity to use drug and alcohol treatment as well as mental health treatment when they probably don't need it or won't need it. The 60 year old must pay 100% of the insurance premium for the spouse. So the 20 something is basically subsidizing coverage for the 60 year old even though they pay the same, because more than likely the 60 year old will use the insurance more than the 20 something. See the premiums are based on the coverage included whether or not the individual uses it or even qualifies for the usage. Women with no male dependents on a group plan may have included PSA testing, as well as the man with no female dependents have covered OBGYN visits or mammograms. It is all included in the premium charge.
I realize insurance is a bet against the what ifs, but options would help both the individual and the companies financially. Instead the government with the all benevolent eye and the money tree in the yard thinks this would be unfair to give options to help with costs. Well, guess what, things aren't fair and never will be. Because of government regulation, insurance companies who are not government entities generally speaking and who are trying to make money are being forced to insure things for everybody when the issues may only apply to a few. Thus the cost of coverage goes sky high for everybody. I also understand that picking and choosing what to cover and not cover would be quite difficult to manage in a company too.
What does happen though is the 20 something female who is healthy may choose to not pay for the insurance through a company because it is cutting into her lifestyle, and she is relatively healthy without realizing the chance that health can change. What she needs would be a major medical only option where the 60 something would need everything except the drug/alcohol abuse and pregnancy options thus being covered for needs without extra cost. I believe there is a way to give the options saving everyone money.
The majority of people who are uninsured are uninsured because they can't find insurance to cover what they need instead having to pay high premiums to cover things they will never use. Some of them are employed and choose not to take the company insurance due to the cost because the unused services are already factored into the plans/prices. I can't say that I blame them. I would rather pay a house note, groceries, a new car, vacations etc than to pay for health insurance coverage I won't use.
The health insurance industry needs to be overhalled true, but not by the government. The government caused the problem in the first place. Because of all this government regulation, you will be hard pressed to find a doctor's office who can help adjust prices for you if you aren't covered. 50K for a surgery is a lot if you aren't insured, but hospitals and doctors can help set up payment plans.
I think Americans need to also overhall their own thoughts about insurance. Look at car insurance, oil changes and general maintenance are not normally covered. Think of your own health the same way. It isn't the oil changes so to speak that will break you. It is the big car wreck without insurance that will. The major illnesses and accidents in life that will cost the most. A $120 wellness visit once a year can be planned and saved for. A $360 dollar total female exam can be saved for once a year. But $100,000 cancer treatment can't, that is when you need insurance. Yep, I know Rx can run a pretty sum, get your doctor's help in giving samples when possible, generics, or lower cost drugs with the same effect.
If you are in a situation where you can't afford group insurance or full coverage insurance then find a major medical only policy to get covered. The higher the deductible the cheaper the plan. Work the payments out for the deductible with the hospital or what not. They are out there. Generally healthy people without illnesses like diabetes or other types of maintenance required illnesses, can get relatively inexpensive or affordable coverage if you aren't looking at getting all the bells and whistles. There are also co-op health care programs that can be found if you take the time to look.
And G and I are insured for under $200 a month but pregnancy isn't covered and neither is some issue with her eye right now. If she needs surgery I will be totally responsible for it. Being unemployed doesn't make me like the idea but if she needs it I will do what it takes. Right now we have time. I can become employed soon hopefully and start a savings account for her eye. Her eye doctor has already suggested that she would work with us on it too. If we get really sick though we are covered. If we are harmed in anyway, we are covered.
For a different perspective on Obama's government proposal of health care reform go here.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
The joys of summer evenings are being discovered by G this year. One of those joys being catching lightening bugs. She really hasn't attempted to venture outside much by herself and I have been as reluctant to allow it. This year though as long as Clementine is out, G is okay with being out there. So as soon as we came home tonight she took off outside. I took her net to her so she could catch bugs. She begged for a jar but I was thinking mason jar of which I have none. I found her empty seaweed jar then and put foil with (too large) holes in it. Two of the bugs escaped in the house later ::shudder:: only to be recaptured and have the foil top replaced with one with much smaller holes.
I remember chasing these at my grandmother's home when we would get to her house on a Friday evening. I don't remember mosquitos being as bad though as they are now. Maybe it was the naivete of childhood or selective memories, I don't know but mosquitos are another reason for my reluctance on being outside. Yes I do spray, her but she still manages a few bites that are painful and annoying.Here are the bugs when I first brought them in. She named them David, Michael and Jack.
The author devotes one chapter to Christian Sectarian Groups such as Jim Jones, David Berg (The Family International), Faith Tabernacle (Philadelphia), Jim Roberts (The Roberts Group) and more, sadly, much more. David Koresh and the Branch Davidians, specifically the Waco raid has its own chapter and is very thorough.
Judaism has a large chapter with lots of really good information including the Jewish Statement of Faith. There is also a lot of historical information that is fascinating about the history of maltreatment of the Jews through out the world. There is a section that helps to define and understand the whole Jewish Arab conflict for those folks who don't know why it is important for Israel to protect itself as a nation. Maybe Obama needs to read this as he is obviously oblivious.
The author gives a Jewish historical time-line from 70AD to 1948 (the creation of the Jewish nation Israel). What I find interesting is that throughout Jewish persecution in 807, 1215, and Hitler (no specific year given) forced the Jews to wear yellow stars. What is up with the yellow stars? Is it to represent the star of David? Honestly I thought Hitler was the only one to do that and that was bad then. Yes the Jewish people have faced hostility through out history and those who call themselves Christians are not exempt from guilt in this.
In this book there are separate chapters on Orthodoxy, Protestantism and Roman Catholicism. Though some of the basic tenants of each of these are the same, there a still great differences between them. The author gives explanations about the splits or schisms that basically brought about these three dominant Christian religions. One thing pointed out is that the protestant church is not one group like Roman Catholics or the Orthodox church.
Within Protestantism there are even more factions or groups broken into denominations, large and small. The thing to remember is that within Protestantism the splits in denomination will not split on the core fundamentals of who Christ is, how He saved us, and how to be saved. The splits come from baptism beliefs, how to make disciples as instructed, and other non-essentials of the faith. For me, a protestant, it is important to see how we came to be and what other protestants believe or have historically believed.
This would be way to long to go on about each chapter but every religion major or minor you could think of is here, well researched and very well written.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Here is the problem with the whole gay marriage thing. Marriage is not equal to love and love is not equal to marriage. If it is, as the gay activists claim, arbitrary discrimination to define marriage as one man and one woman, then it is just as arbitrary to define marriage as a union between two people who love each other.
See there is another sect of people in what is called poly-amorous arrangements, who love each member of the triad (or however many people in the union) equally and can claim discrimination regarding marriage being defined as only 2 people. If you can't define marriage as one man and one woman only, then you can't limit it in number either. That means any number of persons in a mutually loving arrangement would have a right to be defined in a marriage with all the "benefits" thereof. You can't stop the slippery slope, folks. It is there and glaring. What do we need a two by four up the head to wake up and realize the truth of this?
It is just as discriminatory to limit marriage to two loving people as the gay activists claim defining marriage as one woman and one man is. It isn't about love. Don't e-mail me or comment and say, "You can't help who you fall in love with," because I will point out all the arranged marriages that have love in the marriage whether it started out with love or not. And if you throw up the abuse in arranged marriages argument then I will throw out the abuse in self chosen marriage arrangements.
Love is a choice not a feeling. Lust is an emotion that is arbitrary so to speak. Infatuation maybe can't be helped but love definitely can!
Besides haven't you heard the adage, "If you hang out with truckers you will marry truckers and if you hang out with doctors you will marry a doctor?" Nothing wrong with truckers, it is just the point that you will fall in love with whomever belongs in the same group with which you associate.
So get this whole love equals marriage thing out of the conversation. It is as emotionally charged as claiming that killing babies is a choice. Knock it off right now and let us look at society and what is best for society.
Even the APA came out (pun not intended) recently and said there is no gay gene. The lifestyle is a choice not a sentence that society places on someone. Enjoy the lifestyle if you wish, but don't force the foundation of society to crumble because of a wish to redefine one of the building blocks.
Marriage is not a right! And there is no discrimination in it. A man is free to marry any woman whom he chooses as a woman is free to marry any man whom she chooses. One man and one woman for marriage only and always, it was decreed in the beginning of creation. It is not man's design to re-define.
This whole marriage debate is not what it appears on the surface. It is about total acceptance of a lifestyle that is clearly deviant in nature. If you make the topic emotional enough without facts then sane people who would otherwise think clearly, won't think at all and will be lead by the nose down an emotional road with no return. Wake up! Marriage is one of those funny words that should not be redefined for any reason. Leave it one man and one woman for always.
"They say that people mellow with age. However, the older I get, the less patience I have with cleverness.
"If increased government spending with borrowed or newly created money is a "stimulus," then the Weimar Republic should have been stimulated to unprecedented prosperity, instead of runaway inflation and widespread economic desperation that ultimately brought Adolf Hitler to power.
"Just days after Colin Campbell informed us that the American people were willing to pay higher taxes in order to get government services-- and that Republicans therefore needed to stop their opposition to taxes-- California voters resoundingly defeated a bill to raise taxes in order to pay for the many government services in that liberal state.
"Who was it who said: 'I cannot tell what powers may have to be exercised in order to win this war'? George W. Bush? Dick Cheney? Donald Rumsfeld? Actually it was Franklin D. Roosevelt, in a "fireside chat" broadcast on September 7, 1942. He understood that survival was the number one right, without which all other rights are meaningless.
"They say adversity concentrates the mind. Now that Republicans have been badly beaten in two consecutive Congressional elections, what Republican leaders in Congress are saying today makes more sense than what they said when they were in power.
"When my sister's children were teenagers, she told them that, if they got into trouble and ended up in jail, to remember that they had a right to make one phone call. She added: 'Don't waste that call phoning me.' We will never know whether they would have followed her advice, since none of them was ever in jail.
"One of the most important talents for success in politics is the ability to make utter nonsense sound not only plausible but inspiring. Barack Obama has that talent. We will be lucky if we escape the catastrophes into which other countries have been led by leaders with that same charismatic talent.
"When I think of the people with serious physical or mental handicaps who nevertheless work, I find it hard to sympathize with able-bodied men who stand on the streets and beg. Nor can I sympathize with those who give them money that subsidizes a parasitic lifestyle which allows such men to be a constant nuisance, or even a danger, to others.
"How surprising is it that Barack Obama, who spent decades hanging out with people who spewed out their hatred of America, did not say anything in the presence of foreign rulers like Hugo Chavez and Daniel Ortega, when they spewed out their hatred of America?
"We seem to be moving steadily in the direction of a society where no one is responsible for what he himself did but we are all responsible for what somebody else did, either in the present or in the past.
"Why let discussions with visiting celebrities be a constant distraction during a televised tennis match or baseball game?
"If we each sat down and wrote out all the mistakes we have made in our lives, all the paper
needed would require cutting down whole forests.
"Much discussion of the interrogation of captured terrorists ignores the inescapable reality of trade-offs. The real question is: How many American lives are you prepared to sacrifice, in order to spare a terrorist from experiencing distress?
"Governments should govern, not micro-manage the economy. A government unrealistic enough to think it can micro-manage is likely to do a worse job than most.
"Inspiring as it is to study the history of the struggles and sacrifices that created and preserved America, it is also painful to see how all those investments of efforts and lives are being frittered away today for short-sighted and self-centered reasons.
"Why the mere relocation of imprisoned terrorists from Guantanamo to prisons in the United States is a moral issue in the first place is by no means clear, since morality deals with behavior, rather than location. But putting them within the jurisdiction of liberal circuit court judges who can find reasons to turn them loose is a much more serious issue."
I am amazed at the approval rating of OB when compared to congress and to the question of the direction the country is going. How in the world does he get a high approval rating when he is one of the direct causes of the country going in the wrong direction and that is towards socialism? Are Americans just blind or does OB have a magic crystal to blind the minds of thinking Americans? Or are Americans truly only blaming congress? Pelosi and her ilk are only taking OB's plans and making them reality. Thomas Sowell is spot on. Check him and other wonderful thinkers out at Townhall.com.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Saturday, May 23, 2009
Now she is a big pre-school graduate. The practices lead me to believe the actual graduation was going to be really bad but there were only a few moments that one or two kids acted out. There were some honest kid moments that were pretty funny. But the pics are below. G picked her own outfit out by the way. I had a really cute feminine pant suit (kid friendly) that I wanted her to wear but she said her friend M wouldn't like it, grrrr! So she knows I will always allow her to wear her Chinese outfits if she asks so she did.
Walking in, too fast pic.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Okay so here are some questions asked in bold: (my answers are in italics)
and from EveryDayMom Designs concurring with Kerri's Mom:
What is your greatest fear when it comes to life with G? That she will be abducted or killed, that I can't protect her from all ill will toward her. That someone might hurt her feelings over her adoption or her being Chinese. That I would fail her as her mom. Gosh, and I could name so many more fears all related to her safety.
Is Motherhood everything you expected it to be? Yes and more. Somethings about motherhood surprised me and showed me all of my issues.
What surprised you? The stress to be a good mom (and what does that mean anyway?) and how quickly my hot buttons were activated by this little child who barely knew me. I didn't realize how high strung I truly was until G came home. Then I realized that I had a very set way about things and didn't particularly want it "messed up." I am working on loosening up because I have to, heh.
Do you miss your life pre-adoption? I miss the money I made and the countries I visited but if I could have the money and the travels with G then that would be the bomb. If going back meant G wouldn't be my daughter, I wouldn't want it. So I guess there are aspects to my prior life I miss but not enough to not have G in my life.
What is the one thing you wish you had known before you went to China? That G would bond with my dad, and that it would have been fine for me to go about my own business getting photos and video of China. I worried she would bond with my mom which for some reason I thought I could handle better. I missed a lot of sight seeing because of self pity.
Before adopting? The future so I wouldn't have quit my job in 2006 leading to the problems I am in right now.
What is the one accessory as a parent that you cannot live without?! Purell hand sanitizer on my keychain.
I'm curious how you became an adopted single mom and if it's what you expected? It is harder than I expected so I think my expectations were screwie. I think I thought this baby would just fit right into my life, and I wouldn't have to change much. I mean sure I knew I couldn't go grocery shopping at midnight anymore but that wasn't a big change. I just knew I could plop her in the jogging stroller and keep running. WRONG! She hated it with a hatred so great her head looked like it would spin off. I lost at least one friend over not having the time to spend with her because of G, oh well. So yeah, strange expectations I guess. I wouldn't trade it.
First, you have to know my fatastic history regarding my own plans for my life. In 6th grade I knew I was going to be married with 6 children, 2 sets of twins and two singletons. I would be married by age 24 even working on my PhD. Well, so, okay, none of that happened.
I had dated several guys, when old enough of course, and had two proposals/one engagement. That engagement blew up in my face. So as I gradually grew older, closer to 30, and didn't find a mister right; I decided that if I were not married by 35, then I wouldn't marry at all. Of course my 6 kids in my childhood fantasies would not come to fruition unmarried, and I also had/have no interest in birthing a baby from my body (11th grade human phys took care of that). I then decided that I would adopt because I did still wanted to be a mom. I knew of an independently wealthy woman who had adopted two from China so I figured I could do it too.
I had a passion for pro-life, so I stuck my money where my mouth is so to speak. Of course I have come to realize that isn't the best reason for adopting, but at the time I had some different ideas about adoption. I mean I chose China initially because of fear of families coming back to take away my baby. Little did I know that when I learned about adoption, how much Iwould want to know her first family to give her that information. Anyway, that is how I became a single adoptive mom. Very few regrets and none about G.
Any advice to the other moms out there.
My advice is be patient with yourself or you won't be with your child and I am learning that still. Slowly and painfully but still learning it.
and from Ohilda:
Have you always been pro-life or was there a defining moment in your life that changed your view?
I have always been pro-life. I never understood the pro-death or pro-choice position because it is inconsistent with all other laws. You cannot choose to shoot up heroine into your own body without being outside the law, so why should you be able to kill a baby inside your body within the law? Also, you have to wear seatbelts or you are breaking the law, so again, how can you call it legal to kill a baby. Even prostitution is illegal as is not being treated if you have TB and those things deal with your own body too. Yes, a person can choose to be outside the law, but that is where they will be outside the law! Plus with abortion there are two distinct bodies not one two individuals to deal with not to mention the father and grandparents.
from AZ Mom:
If you could change one thing in your life what would it be and why?
Different more useful degree that would now be marketable in this job market.
What is the most embarrasing thing that has happened to you since G came home?
One morning in the coffee shop on the way to Sunday School I was ordering and G was behind me. I had on a skirt that was long and billowy. G was flirting with the other patrons who were behind me as I faced the counter. She wasn't quite 2 or was just 2 I can't remember. And she without me knowing had lifted my skirt to hide. I felt a slight breeze and heard muffled laughter. As I reached for her I realized what she had done. She flashed all my business to everyone there.
from Ellie Monster (PWP):
Did you always know you wanted to adopt? Be a mom? I knew I wanted to be a mom but I am not sure I knew exactly how I would do that until a bit older like high school.
What made you decide on China? Initially China was the "safe" country meaning safe from returning birthfamilies to take away the child I loved. Also, since she would look different from me I thought it might save her from being judged on what people saw as her mother's poor morals, ie out of wedlock birth and all that jazz. I do live in the south you know.
When I started the adoption and started reading cultural things and about adoption/adoptees specifically I realized my initial reason was ridiculous. I want to know who G's first family/birth family is. I would love to meet them and re-introduce her to them. It is very sad though that we may never have that ability or opportunity to do so.
As far as the process, at the time, China was the safest process regarding predictability and paperwork. I went in knowing exactly what to expect and when, not like today with long wait times. So despite the wait times, China is still safe as in knowing what to expect and everyone's travel being the same etc.
Okay, so that wasn't so bad. Hope I answered everyone's questions clearly. Maybe on the next big milestone I will open it up again. If you didn't get a chance, sorry> That just means you need to stop by more often, heh.
Oh how I love words, apparently. Keeping a journal could be said to be in my blood. My grandmother kept a journal for years. I picked it up from her. We have some of her journals still. I was inspired once to put it all in a book to publish for her children and grandchildren until I started reading them. I figured I had better stop that 'cause it might cause hurt feelings, and no she wasn't mean but truthful in her concerns.
Then as a high school senior I had a horrible teacher who made us keep a journal a specific way with a specific number of words for each entry. Never mind that I had at least 10 journals completed that proved I was going to write each day; she required different than what I was doing and it ticked me off. So I tried to get her back by writing stuff that never happened in such depth and sometimes disgust that I just knew she would get tired of reading it. Yep, passive aggressive, that is me. Of course I had to get rid of the journals because most of it was lies for her benefit.
Then I stopped writing in a journal for a while, actually a long while. I would do only travel journals so that started in 1999. But from the blog I have enjoyed the time writing about things that happen in our lives and things in the world that will affect us. I journal about Gs accomplishments and sometimes both of our failures of which I have many. Some of these entries are photos only, but those posts tell a story in time, too. Some of them are entries of ads for pay, which is always nice to receive money for your writing. I guess this is all to say that this blog is all over the place as the title suggests, it is motherhood and all that comes with it, as well as other ramblings in life, and in this world.
I like my little corner of the blogsophere even when what I write causes controversy. I don't like controversy, but if we all thought just alike what kind of world would this be? Pretty boring I must say. Dialogue and discussion are important in this world. It is needed and necessary and if I make someone think about their own life or belief systems a bit differently then great. If I prod someone to stand their ground on an issue, then great. Over all though I want G to be able to come here at some point to discover who I am and who she is through my words.
One day in the hopefully near future, I will open this blog to her so she can contribute her own thoughts. Of course she will have to learn to type and spell somewhat (or use spell check). She already knows how to use a computer, heh.
So here is what I want to do for the big 1500th post. Throw out some topics or questions you would like answered or discussed. For this one time only I will open myself up ::shudder:: to the readers of this blog. Yes, I do this with great trepidation because it is truly easier for me to talk about someone else than it is me, even in this blog. What I won't answer though would be questions that pinpoint exactly where we live or full names etc. I also will not answer anon comments if I don't know you so sign your comments (believe it or not I know some of the anons through other groups or e-mail).
Oh and hurry up because tomorrow is pre-school graduation I so have to post about it. I saw the practice today and um, ugh! I am very afraid. G did very well but I can't say that about
Wednesday, May 20, 2009
It was a true gift that I can't wait to share with G. We are going to start working on her life book this summer. It is very helpful to have tangible information to write/type in her book. This will probably be a very difficult thing for us to do but then again maybe not. I need to let go of my control of this project though because it is her life book not mine.
I was able to (easily I might add) find out the actual day of the week given for G's DOB and finding day. She is a Thursday child like me. Maybe that was the one match, heh. As for pictures of the spot I will not share them here as they are G's to share when she wishes.
Last night in bed she held me and with tears in her voice she said, "Don't eber do dat to me again." She was off and on upset after being reunited from our little separation, as was I. I did continue to praise her for going to the neighbor, and I have since pieced together what exactly happened. Next time I will just tell her where I am going and not assume she will stay engrossed in a movie.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Yeah, yeah I don't always answer questions when I don't wish to get into long conversations and that would have provoked many questions cuz that is what 5 year olds do, ask questions! Besides, I hadn't had my afternoon coffee yet.
So then she said as if she really knew, "Oh I know that is tempertakers." AKA thermometers, heh.
Then tonight while watching "Sleeping Beauty" G proclaims, "Oh I can NOT sweep in my own bed tonight." No, no of course not because the witch in SB is way too scary. Then she said, "Mama, you should NOT have wet me watch dis." Oh how right you are, darlin'.
In about 4 days is the referral anniversary of G. As most readers of the blog know we talk a lot about adoption and how our family was made. My personal philosophy is to talk straight about it all and give as many positive memories on each and every significant day in relation to her adoption. Today is also a significant day. This is the day I call her Finding Day! Which is also the "abandage"ment day in G-English that is.
We also today happened to have therapy today in which G played "put me in a box" with the pillows. Now this doesn't happen to be adoption related as much as therapy related because she has been doing that with the pillows for the last 4 times. G did ask me to "make a storwie out of" her. So I started a story of Mousy Mouse being in TN then in "Cowniafornia" then in "Florwida" then went to China and lived in a box. One day another box was put beside Mousy Mouse's box and when he looked in the other box he found a baby sleeping. That was as far as we got before interest wained in the "making a story" out of her.
So, tonight hasn't ended so well. While G was busily watching Barney I decided to take the trash out through the back door. G was in the front of the house. I didn't tell her where I was going. Didn't think I needed too. I came back in from the back too, noticed she wasn't in her seat, thought she was in the bathroom, but she wasn't. So I started looking for her. I went in the bathrooms, the closet, her room, out the front door when I saw it unlocked and walked around to the back. I went in and out no less than 4 times screaming her name with panic setting in. I just knew she had wandered off looking for me.
Well, she had sort of wandered off, sort of. She herself was also in a panic when she realized I wasn't there. She had gone to two neighbors' home and one answered. He called my dad. My dad and mom called my cell phone twice, which I didn't have on me as I wasn't going anywhere.
I of course was thinking I was going to have to call them and started really panicking. One last look out the front door found her and our neighbor on his porch. I was so relieved and then mad then relieved again and then felt bad because I noticed she had been crying. They had been inside and couldn't hear me screaming. I figured everyone could hear me screaming.
My dad called my neighbor back, and he let me answer it. I told him everything was okay. I praised G for going to the neighbor's home but I also pointed out that my car was there, my purse was inside and my keys were inside. I also pointed out that she had to unlock the front door in order to leave whereas if I had gone out that door it would have been unlocked already.
So maybe this was a memorable day after all but not necessarily the best way to have it!
Monday, May 18, 2009
Here is a bit of our latest conversation. One night G gave up her prize and decided to sleep in my bed. I was very tired and dozing in and out
So by then I was
These are two very important points that need to be understood by people but are never clearly stated in the main stream media or from those on the left. First off lets talk about embryonic stem cell research. Just as the name implies, there is an embryo or lets call it the beginning of a human, mm'kay? (Even better a new developing human). The researcher takes this beginning of a human and kills it, harvesting stem cells along the way with the belief that these cells will grow into whatever the researcher happens to be studying. By the way this doesn't work. Because humans were created in the image of God these cells will never be coaxed into doing something other than becoming a human. There are numerous studies showing how the embryonic stem cells turn into malignant tumors.
Now lets talk about other stem cells or adult stem cells, cord blood stem cells or any other none beginning of a human stem cell. These stem cells can be harvested without killing and are more promising than the new baby or soon to be new baby stem cells. So far there are something like 76+ diseases that adult stem cell has cured or is curing. And I don't know why that number is stuck in my head and it could be really low meaning there are more disease than that being cured by adult stem cells.
The adult stem cells are working and doing what researchers want it to do. There is no need to use embryonic stem cells. Scientifically speaking that is, there is no need to use the embryonic stem cells unless there is a plan to clone for body parts. Oh yes, that would be the only reason there is a big deal on this issue with liberal leftist scientists.
Now lets look at funding of these projects. There has never (read that again) NEVER been a ban on funding embryonic stem cell research. Did you read that? Do you understand that? The ban is on the tax payer funded research of embryonic stem cell research. You know that great big money tree in the back of the white house where obama is going to get all the money necessary to fund his big government projects? Yeah, yeah, that one. HA! You know where that money tree is, the IRS, tax collection of the people!
Private research money can and could have always paid to research embryonic stem cells any time. BUT, here is a BIG BUT, but the private sector knows that there will be failure at every turn of embryonic stem cells because it doesn't work; therefore, no profit, no funding/no results, no funding. See scientists have no problem wasting tax payer money on piss poor projects that produce nothing. And apparently this administration has no problem throwing tax payer money away on bad research. Private investors will not stand for such waste, government apparently will. Remember it isn't the government's money; it is ours!
Obama turned the clock backwards with regard to science on this and the abortion issues. He doesn't understand good money management either, or he would quit bailing out failing institutions. Bush allowed for limited funding on limited lines of embryonic stem cells but the main stream media and leftist socialist scientists said it wasn't enough. They, greedy as they are, wanted more but not more unless it comes from the tax payers.
Catholics should be ashamed of Notre Dame for allowing the most pro-death president to speak. He even misrepresented his own abortion stance. And if he really wanted more adoptions as he claimed in the speech then the adoption tax credit wouldn't be in danger of expiring this year.
Where are the pro-life Catholics? Why aren't all Catholics pro-life? Isn't that a main tenet of the Catholic faith? Why aren't those of us who call ourselves Christians pro-life? How can a true follower of Jesus and for that matter where are the Jews? How can we not call ourselves pro-life? God, on which the major religions are founded, favors life. He gave reasons to take life and it was always with regard to criminals who killed and to protect life as in war.
Don't give me that "heart wrenching decision" bs Obama spouts, because there shouldn't have to be a difficult decision between killing a child or bringing that child into the world. It should be to bring the life into the world and decide to parent this child or give the child up for adoption (without manipulation). Adoption should be the only heart wrenching decision being made in a crisis pregnancy.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
See Obama comes from the Chicago political machine and knows you keep your friends close and enemies closer. So by making these potential contenders a part of his office extension or representatives of his administration they can't then come and run against him. See the Utah Gov will be in China when he should be campaigning for office. So then how do you knock the pres out of his seat?
Well, we need to pray that a true pro-life, pro-traditional marriage contender comes along. God knows who and where that person is.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
The deal was G had to go to sleep before me in my bed then I would move her. After her first two day "win" she didnt' go to sleep before me again, seriously I can sleep anywhere just about any time. Monday night she knew she wasn't going to get another "prize" because she wouldn't go to sleep, so she decided to go to her bed awake and fall asleep in her own bed. I didn't think she would really do it but she did.
I put the night light in the hall for her to see in case she was afraid and needed to get back in my bed. I told her that I would always make room for her, but she wouldn't make a whole night in her bed and would get no prize. Well, she managed to do that two nights in a row and received a prize for both nights. Hey, I recognize
So last night she was having a particularly bad attempt at going to sleep in her own bed and decided to forgo her prize to sleep with me. I was all, like, whatever, no biggie, let's not make a big deal out of her failure to not sleep in her own bed. This morning, though, she starts to stir which of course wakes me up but I think she is going to potty (Yea! another big step, that is without me reminding her).
So I waited, and waited, and waited; 5 mins turned to 10 then to 30 mins and she wasn't back, I heard no flushing, and she didn't call me. So I got up to go potty myself and then I saw her door, open, with her awake but in her own bed. Oh yes she did, she tried to trick me into thinking she slept in her own bed all night, heh.
Mind games might have worked, 'cuz I have been known to be forgetful, except for the decidedly small space I was left to sleep in with her crunched up against me making me very hot in our southern city and her whacking me in the face trying to get situated around midnight. My body didn't forget that I had no room last night to sleep!
Good try there G, you have to get up much MUCH earlier to trick me. It's not like I was born yesterday, ya know?! I will turn into the prize nazi-"No prize for you!"
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Here is the big question though, when the women went to an adoption agency for help during a crisis pregnancy, what were the workers supposed to do and what did the women really want? If there is a woman already adoption minded, then the conversation continues along the way of the already adoption minded woman. Should it stop? Yes, manipulation should stop but adoption shouldn't necessarily stop. The workers may feel that if there isn't an adoption plan the woman in crisis pregnancy will abort, thus leaving herself the mom of a dead baby (I don't know for sure but if I were a counselor I would prefer an adoption plan rather than an abortion plan).
A woman should never be told they are bad for getting pregnant and should never be made to feel that the only way to redemption is to give the baby up for adoption. It doesn't work that way. A woman shouldn't be told how expensive it is to raise a baby and how destitute they will be if they do it alone either just to encourage her to place her child for adoption. There should be outrage on this topic and first moms are outraged (that is another recurring theme) and rightly so.
So having said that, the choice between being manipulated into delivering and giving up a live baby to adoption verses being manipulated in the same manner to kill a baby via abortion, then I say keep the manipulation in place for a live baby. The same manipulation techniques that are used to convince a woman to place a baby for adoption are condemned whole heartedly while being congratulated and perpetuated in the abortion mills of planned parenthood for money.
I hear the cry of adoption being this big money industry that hurts women, but where are the same cries with regard to planned parenthood? Money is pretty necessary to function in this world. Money itself isn't the problem but attitude regarding it is a problem.
Yes, it is a shame if someone is getting rich on adoption. It is an indescribable BIGGER shame though that abortionists are getting rich on killing babies!!
I feel very sorry for any woman who would have been able to raise a baby but through manipulation gave that baby up for adoption. But I also must say that since that baby was adopted there is a chance (in some cases a small chance) that there can be a reunion. If that baby isn't even given the chance for life though, then there will never be a way for reunion. Reunion didn't happen for my aunt and her son due to her death but we, his extended family, are still here and it could happen.
Adoptive parents should step up and stand with first moms to stop the manipulation. But both adoptive parents and first moms should stand shoulder to shoulder in the battle against abortion.
Where are the cries? Where is the outrage? Why do millions of babies continually die at the hands of manipulative abortionists for money (even government money) while we adoptive parents, bio parents and first parents sit by silently?
I know that some crisis pregnancy centers do collect things like baby furniture, clothes and other newborn necessities as well as pregnant lady stuffs to help women who wish to parent. I have been to the showers and spoken to the directors. So maybe an action step would be to volunteer at these centers and mentor women who are in crisis pregnancy.
I realize adoption practices world wide should be revamped and I don't have an answer. There is a church in Washington state that is helping families adopt and the only cost is the paperwork to the state agencies and maybe for the women who are pregnant (but that I am not sure of). In other words, the church itself receives no money for any part of the process, not even an application fee but you have to be a resident of Washington. Ken Hutchinson (or Hutcherson), an ex-football player turned minister set it up recently out of his church. I think they only do domestic too but I am not sure of that either.
I know adoption shouldn't wipe a family out financially just as adoption shouldn't be the first option given a woman in crisis pregnancy. Abortion shouldn't be an option at all, though. There is an answer out there because truth does exist. We mere mortals just need to put our creative heads together and come up with a workable solution. The other side to that is that we are mere mortals with many many faults.
Please hear my heart on this, manipulation in all forms should stop for any reason. Abortion should stop forever.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
So basically Pelosi is just stupid. She was told about the interrogation techniques but didn't think the CIA was actually USING them. So why the helk do you suppose they would bother mentioning them if they didn't use them? I mean come on, she is changing her tune because right after 9/11 republicans and democrats would have done ANYTHING to prevent anything happening on our soil again. But now time has put plenty of distance between the actions of 9/11 and the fear of the people so that today she can say with certainty that she had no idea waterboarding was being used and worked at actually saving American lives, all for political gain. Actually, Pelosi shouldn't even be in office if she is really that
Maybe waterboarding is wrong technically speaking but when lives are at stake, "pretty please" doesn't cut it. And with the terrorists in the middle east things that threaten their own lives may not work much longer. It is hard to defeat an enemy who has no respect for any life much less their own.
That is the problem with the suicide bombers. That is what is wrong in Israel. Israel cares that citizens don't die, they care about their soldiers not dying, and they care about civilians not dying. The terrorists trying to push Israel into the sea doesn't care about lives being lost. Americans care that lives are being lost and would like to have peace without loss of life. Terrorists don't care about peace and care less about numbers of people dying unless it brings NATO down on Israel or America as political pawns.
Until America wakes up and understands what we are up against, we will have another 9/11. The threat is real. It is very sad that the new administration hasn't a clue and is even tying Israel concessions into Iran's nukes when these issues are mutually exclusive!! All of this is tied to the
Monday, May 11, 2009
Now dinner is done at least for me, movie is watched and we need to go to bed. G is taking forever finishing her dinner. She has been extremely creative today though. She finished painting the clay pot she made and then fingerpainted two pics. We are going to a museum in the morning then to our appt. Wed I think we are meeting an FCC family at the zoo if it doesn't rain.
I may post my thoughts on another blog but I will let you know when I do it. I also have a couple of G conversations about Hannah Montana and all the places we went in China to "check out" G (her words not mine).
So I will for sure update tomorrow or Wednesday.
Sunday, May 10, 2009
It is really sad that there are so many parents who don't know how to parent well. It is very sad that there are some mom's who willingly or under pressure chose to become a parent of a dead child via abortion. It is very sad that some mom's are trapped in marriages that are both harmful to the mom but also to the child whom she cannot protect. Our world is cursed by sin but God tells us to honor these parents anyway.
It is very sad that some mom's for whatever reason can't or won't parent the child to whom they give birth. It is very sad that some women will never experience new life within their own bodies due to infertility or celibate singleness. It is very sad that some mom's and daughters or sons have such a fractured relationship that communication is virtually nil. Our world is cursed by sin that causes death, illness, corrupt governments, bad family planning policies and fractured relationships. God tells us to honor our parents.
For those women waiting either for their own bodies to work and birth a baby or for those waiting in the adoption line for a child, don't give up, and you are honored here for your willingness to parent and love a child. For those who have children even children who have passed due to illness or miscarriage, you are honored here for the willingness to give birth and parent through difficult circumstances of loving a child pre-born or through an illness such as cancer.
For the women who were unable or unwilling to parent due to government policies, understand of your own circumstances, or your own choice for whatever reason, you are honored here for loving your child through pregnancy, delivery and placement for adoption. You have shown you loved your child enough to make a difficult decision for another.
Saturday, May 09, 2009
"'Hate crimes' bill is full of swill
"Matt Barber - Guest Columnist - 5/7/2009 10:15:00 AM
"Senate sponsors and liberal activist proponents of the federal "hate crimes" bill, S. 909, have been caught in a series of bald-faced lies. So confident am I of this, that if they can prove me wrong (for real I mean – you know, with evidence and such) I'll join their little soirée, don a very large pink evening gown and publicly voice support for the legislation. To the express exclusion of other identifiable groups – including veterans, the elderly and the homeless – S. 909, in its current form, would grant special federal resources and preferred minority status to pedophiles, homosexuals, cross-dressers and – as Democratic sponsor Alcee Hastings recently admitted on the House floor – a host of other APA recognized "sexual orientations" (i.e., deviant sexual fetishes and perversions).
"Not only is this legislation constitutionally dubious on First Amendment grounds, and a prima facie violation of Fourteenth Amendment required "equal protection of the laws;" it also flies in the face of the Tenth Amendment, which explicitly limits the federal government's authority in such matters to those powers delegated by the U.S. Constitution.
"Here's how they're doing it:
"In order for the feds to usurp the States' police power, liberals in Congress have had to openly place, within the very language of the bill, a series of transparent lies. To get around that pesky old Constitution and accomplish this brash federal power grab, they've been forced to misuse and abuse the Commerce Clause.
"In a feeble attempt to constitutionally justify federal interference with local law enforcement, S. 909's sponsors have made – within the bill's "Findings" section – several outlandish and unsustainable claims relative to "interstate commerce." So outlandish are these claims, in fact, that the same language was intentionally withdrawn from the House version before it was passed and referred to the Senate.
"But since the bill's Senate sponsors recognize that failure to include these fantasy "findings" immediately renders the legislation unconstitutional, the interstate commerce language has quickly and quietly found its way home.
"First, while addressing "hate crimes" allegedly motivated by so-called "sexual orientation" bias, the bill asserts that existing law is "inadequate to address this problem." This is patently untrue.
"When the legislation's 1968 "hate crimes" forerunner was introduced, there were multiple and verifiable cases of local prosecutors refusing to indict whites for violent crimes committed against blacks. Moreover, the 1968 law was actually conceived and passed with the primary purpose of righting this specific wrong.
"The exact opposite is true today. As FBI statistics reveal, in the relatively few instances where bias motivated crimes are committed against homosexuals or cross-dressers, those crimes are, without fail, zealously prosecuted under existing law. Victims are granted "equal protection of the laws" regardless of sexual preference or proclivity.
"Yet these same victims are, nonetheless, shamelessly and publicly exploited by homosexual activists and the mainstream media as the latest "hate crimes" cause célèbre. This, even as hypersensitive local prosecutors bend over backwards to take-down alleged 'gay-bashing' assailants as to avoid kneejerk accusations of systemic 'homophobia.'
"To illustrate the point, one need look only to the most famous supposed "hate crimes" victim of all, Matthew Shepard, who, as it later turned out, was killed during a robbery for drug money gone awry.
"This fact notwithstanding, the left continues to disgracefully politicize Shepard's memory by claiming he was murdered simply for being "gay." Indeed, this very legislation, S. 909, is cited as the 'Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act.'
"The bizarre irony is palpable. The two thugs who killed Shepard are currently serving life sentences for their crimes – and rightfully so – in the complete absence of any discriminatory and unnecessary "hate crimes" legislation. Justice prevailed and existing law was undeniably '[adequate] to address this problem.'
"In fact, I challenge proponents of S. 909 to provide one verifiable example of a prosecutor refusing to charge a violent criminal because the victim was a homosexual or a cross-dresser.
"They won't. They can't.
"But back to the interstate commerce charade:
"Here, the federal government's own statistics serve to derail the "hate crimes" gravy train. According to the FBI, in 2007 – out of 1.4 million violent crimes in the U.S. – there were a mere 247 cases of aggravated assault (including five deaths) allegedly motivated by the victim's 'sexual orientation.'
"Yet S. 909 makes the fantastic claim that there is an epidemic of such "hate crimes." So many, in fact, that it "poses a serious national problem." The bill hysterically declares – while providing zero evidence – the following nonsense:
"• Such violence substantially affects interstate commerce in many ways;
"• [T]he movement of members of targeted groups (homosexuals, pedophiles, cross-dressers, etc.) is impeded, and members of such groups are forced to move across State lines to escape the incidence or risk of such violence;
"• Members of targeted groups are prevented from purchasing goods and services, obtaining or sustaining employment, or participating in other commercial activity;
"And, here's the kicker. Wait for it ....Wait for it:
"• Perpetrators cross State lines to commit such violence.
"So there you have it, folks. If it weren't so serious, it'd be comical. But let's make sure we have it straight. According to Barney Frank, Ted Kennedy, Barack Obama and their S. 909 cheerleading cohorts, we must pass S. 909 immediately because right here, right now in America, it's not at all unusual to witness terrified hordes of fabulously dressed – yet wrongfully unemployed – "gays" and otherwise gender-confused blokes in lipstick and Jimmy Choo pumps, frantically fleeing Dolce & Gabbana before they've even had a chance to make a purchase, while inbred, homophobic, bat-wielding rednecks hotly pursue them across state lines.
"Don't think I'll be wearing that pink evening gown any time soon."
Friday, May 08, 2009
Riding the merry-go-round.
Wednesday, May 06, 2009
Even in down economic times it is important to take care of yourself by getting away for a few days, spending quality time with family on special outings, and making lasting memories with your kids. What could be more perfect than taking time to go to Florida? Depending on where you live, it could be a nice drive down which gives more quality time
Seriously, do you remember your family vacations? Even the worst ones give
So click on over to the Kissimmee website and register for your chance to win. That drawing is coming up very soon and you know you need the freedom to enjoy time away from the daily grind. Besides you have to register to win before May 22, 2009. So what are you waiting for? Check it out.
by Ben Shapiro
"One hundred days into Barack Obama's presidency, he demonstrated cowardice abroad and demagogic tyranny at home. On the 105th day of his presidency, he demonstrated his clear-cut anti-Semitism.
"On Monday, Rahm Emanuel, the president's hatchet man, delivered a message to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. According to the Jerusalem Post, Emanuel stated, 'Thwarting Iran's nuclear program is conditional on progress in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.' The message is clear: America will bar any action against Iran unless Israel makes concessions to the Palestinian Arab thugs who seek to eviscerate all Jewish presence east of the Mediterranean.
"Emanuel isn't the first Obama lackey to link American opposition to Iran with Israeli concessions. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton told Congress, 'For Israel to get the kind of strong support it's looking for vis-a-vis Iran, it can't stay on the sidelines with respect to the Palestinians and the peace efforts.' The two issues -- Iranian nuclear development and the Israeli-Arab conflict -- 'go hand in hand.'
"This is pure nonsense. The Iranian nuclear program threatens not only Israel, but U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, the government of Turkey, the government of Saudi Arabia, and the territory of Eastern Europe. Iran's centrifuges make it a regional power, able to leverage its calculated irrationality into fearful appeasement by the West. America's interest in the Iranian nuclear program has nothing to do with the Israeli-Arab conflict.
"The Obama administration knows this. They simply don't care. Their position is clear: America's ally, Israel, is no longer valuable. Sacrificing it in order to win Obama global popularity points is a worthwhile pursuit. The Obama administration offers Israel a choice between being a victim of suicide via territorial concessions to the Palestinian Arabs, or a victim of homicide via Iran. And the Obama administration forces that choice so that Obama can smile and wave at cheering throngs of Jew-hating maniacs who populate the Muslim world.
"This is anti-Semitism at its finest. Not even in the heyday of the Carter administration did such anti-Semitism find expression in American foreign policy.
"Obama's defenders no doubt scoff at such accusations.
"Obama, the Man of Tolerance, an anti-Semite?
"Yes. An anti-Semite.
"Obama's attitude toward Israel demonstrates his belief that the Jews should be held to a higher standard than any other nation -- the standard of unrelenting surrender. Take, by contrast, Obama's attitude toward the Pakistani government. The Pakistani government recently conceded the Swat Valley to the Taliban. The Obama administration opposed Pakistan's concessions.
"'I have expressed my concern and confusion about what happened,' fumed Ambassador to Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke. '(T)he chief spokesman of the Taliban in the Swat area publicly renounced the part of the deal in which they're supposed to lay down their arms. And it seems to me that that ought to be a wakeup call to everybody in Pakistan that you can't deal with these people by giving away territory as they creep closer and closer to the populated centers of the Punjab and Islamabad. They're less than 100 miles from Islamabad after this deal ... And I am concerned at the growing risk that you'll have more terrorist attacks in Lahore and Islamabad, perhaps in Karachi.'
"Obama is concerned when a Muslim state populated by radical Muslim sympathizers makes territorial concessions to those radical Muslim sympathizers. He is concerned that those Muslim terrorists will be within 100 miles of a Muslim capital. And he is worried that Muslim terrorist attacks on Muslims will escalate.
"Yet Obama advocates for territorial concessions by Jews to radical Muslims. He presses Jews to hand over territory not 100 miles from the capital, but constituting half the capital itself. He knows that each time Israel has made territorial concessions, Muslim terrorists have upped the ante -- most recently in both Lebanon and the Gaza Strip. And he knows that the Palestinian Arabs have never and will never lay down their arms. Yet he threatens Israel with allowing its nuclear annihilation if Israel refuses to authorize euthanasia.
"During the election campaign, I wrote that Obama was 'the most dangerous candidate for the state of Israel since its creation in 1948.' I wrote, 'Any American Jew who votes for Obama ought to be ashamed of him or herself.' My words were not strong enough. Any Jew who continues to support Obama's foreign policy should turn in his badge as a Jew -- that means you, Rahm Emanuel. And all Americans who support Israel must stand up against a president who values the genocidal murderers in Muslim lands over our democratic allies in the Jewish State."
Obama has turned all of our true allies away through foolish immature gifts to Britain and these pronouncements to Israel. He is the biggest fool of all.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
I was piddling on my sketch pad and drew a picture of a mouse. Actually of two mice, one from the side and one from the front. The frontal view pic G said looked like her mouse except for the whiskers which she fixed. The side view she said looks like a beaver. Oh well. I did say I am not a trained artist but an artist wish I were?
Anyway, mouse has gotten to be much more involved in her life recently. He even went to dinner with us to celebrate grandad's bday. She said mouse sat on grandad's head to eat. Funny thing, I had an imaginary friend when I was growing up. Mom told me once that I left her in a restaurant and my mom had to go back and get her. Then later I had an imaginary mouse friend that lived in the bathtub, heh.
Even one of my nieces had an imaginary friend as a toddler/pre-schooler. Funny thing about those friends when the child has outgrown the need the friend is usually forgotten and remembered only by others who heard the child talk about it. The imaginary friends tend to be a sign of brilliance and/or trauma. Possibly a bit of both because G is brilliant!
Did I mention that G slept in her own bed Saturday night but not last night. I actually moved her after she fell asleep Saturday but Sunday I fell asleep first. Small steps I guess. We will try again this week.
I have therapy today by myself to review the progress I don't feel we are making. I think we are supposed to watch some of the video we have taped. I will update after processing my thoughts on it all.