lindainks55 said:
Near as I can tell by brief visits they don't have many more posters over there than we do here. The biggest difference is we have most of the ones capable of thinking here! It's easy for me to get enough of ksgrm, Kansas, Nathan and Hank pretty quickly! I think those left (from BOTH sides) enjoy arguing. Not just arguing but endless arguing with no point to it. They don't seem to be capable of looking at anything from a different perspective, accepting that there may be more than one way to look at an issue or even to have the ability to respect a person who holds a different viewpoint. I can't figure out the appeal! Thank you again for a place to discuss the issues with people who are sane!
longhorn said:
Yep Linda, that pretty well describes it. I think the sock puppets outnumber the real posters. Most of the thinking posters have left the blog. My understanding is that folks in Topeka used to read over there regularly, and now... they dont. Troll city.
Amazing how one or two posters can ruin a blog.
And ditto on the thanks to Tracy for providing this place for sane discussion.
Amazing how one or two posters can ruin a blog.
And ditto on the thanks to Tracy for providing this place for sane discussion.
Rox said:
It must be the weather. That's what I blame when kids (anybody's) get totally out of control. I've heard several teachers say that when the weather changes or a storm is coming in, students go bonkers. I've studied this for many years (way too many) and my own kids and grandkids are proof that it's true. (There's way too many of those, too.) :)
Or... They're just plain nuts. The next few days should tell the tale.
It appears that J R was the catalyst. He pecked and poked at them long enough, until they errupted. ("They" meaning the major cons.) Any liberal or even semi-liberal is fair game for any and all snarks and nasties. Someone even got snarky with VT, although I don't remember who or over what. And I was attacked yesterday by another lib--Apophis--and called a liar.
But this is what I noticed yesterday afternoon and evening. If a lib ignores Kansas/JM or any of the other major instigators, it gets worse. (Note that Kansas/JM posted the same nearly-libelous posts on all the current threads.) They managed to run off Steven Davis, who wasn't causing trouble. IMHO, their goal is to run off everyone who doesn't agree with them so it's like it was during the boycott. They LIKED that. They had the blog to themselves, pretty much, and no one challenged them. It's SOOOOOOO much easier to spread disinformation when no one questions it.
The Walk On By method works, and if all the libs who hang out there would only practice it, the asylum escapees would go away or (and this would be even better) banned. ;)
But that's just my opinion. Anybody else have one?
Is it time for a Purple Chicken missive, reminding everyone to sit on their hands for a while?
Or... They're just plain nuts. The next few days should tell the tale.
It appears that J R was the catalyst. He pecked and poked at them long enough, until they errupted. ("They" meaning the major cons.) Any liberal or even semi-liberal is fair game for any and all snarks and nasties. Someone even got snarky with VT, although I don't remember who or over what. And I was attacked yesterday by another lib--Apophis--and called a liar.
But this is what I noticed yesterday afternoon and evening. If a lib ignores Kansas/JM or any of the other major instigators, it gets worse. (Note that Kansas/JM posted the same nearly-libelous posts on all the current threads.) They managed to run off Steven Davis, who wasn't causing trouble. IMHO, their goal is to run off everyone who doesn't agree with them so it's like it was during the boycott. They LIKED that. They had the blog to themselves, pretty much, and no one challenged them. It's SOOOOOOO much easier to spread disinformation when no one questions it.
The Walk On By method works, and if all the libs who hang out there would only practice it, the asylum escapees would go away or (and this would be even better) banned. ;)
But that's just my opinion. Anybody else have one?
Is it time for a Purple Chicken missive, reminding everyone to sit on their hands for a while?
Rox said:
Okay, you two, you hit the button before I did. >g< You're both right. They do like to argue, but it was really at its worst yesterday. A madhouse gone...mad.
Tracy, add my thanks, too. There must always be sanctuary somewhere.
Tracy, add my thanks, too. There must always be sanctuary somewhere.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Good morning, all; I've not been "over there" so I don't know what's going on, and from your descriptions, may not.
Weekend was spent as follows: Saturday, to NEMHS to build sets for the fall musical; good progress was made. Sunday, to McPherson to a reception honoring my mother on her 80th birthday, then carefully watching the weather to determine when to leave for home; almost guessed right, as didn't hit the heavy rain, etc., until the intersection of 235 and 135, then drove in rain so hard that couldn't see, etc. Last 10 miles or so were the worst of the trip. I think I'm getting too old to deal with night driving in heavy rain.
Hope you had a good weekend.
Weekend was spent as follows: Saturday, to NEMHS to build sets for the fall musical; good progress was made. Sunday, to McPherson to a reception honoring my mother on her 80th birthday, then carefully watching the weather to determine when to leave for home; almost guessed right, as didn't hit the heavy rain, etc., until the intersection of 235 and 135, then drove in rain so hard that couldn't see, etc. Last 10 miles or so were the worst of the trip. I think I'm getting too old to deal with night driving in heavy rain.
Hope you had a good weekend.
lindainks55 said:
longhorn, I caught the tail end of a news report on CNN about the severe drought in (at least) Georgia, maybe the whole southeast. They said Lake Lanier in Georgia is going down 1- 1/2 foot each month, Atlanta's annual rainfall is down 16" this year, the muscles are being threatened. I wish I had heard it all, maybe it will repeat as they often do on CNN. Sounds like water should be a bigger topic with more attention in many areas of our country!
Vaughn Tolle said:
Linda, don't know if this is the same report I heard, but it also said that Atlanta and the surrounding area is down to three months drinking water supply. I don't know what the contingency plan is if there's no rain, but it sounds like folks may be a bit thirsty if they don't get some substantial rains and soon.
Rox said:
I don't think the friend who emailed this will mind if I post it here.
***
From a NYTimes article:
"With only 15 months left in office, President Bush has left whole agencies of the executive branch to be run largely by acting or interim appointees — jobs that would normally be filled by people whose nominations would have been reviewed and confirmed by the Senate." These positions include:
1. at the Justice Dept., acting Attorney General Peter D. Keisler AND the no. 2 and 3 postions, currently filled by Deputy Attorney General Craig S. Morford and Associate Attorney General Gregory G. Katsas. Also the heads of the department’s civil rights, natural resources and tax divisions are all acting, as are the directors of the elite Office of Legal Counsel and the Office of Legal Policy. And more than one-fourth of the 93 United States attorneys around the country are "temporary"--unconfirmed by the Senate.
2. At Homeland Security: an acting general counsel, acting under secretary for national protection, and acting assistant secretary for strategic plans.
3. At the Department of Health and Human Services, the $600 billion-a-year Medicare and Medicaid programs have had an acting administrator since last fall.
4. At the State Department, the under secretary for arms control and international security.
5. The vacancies include three members of the president's cabinet--the attorney general, as mentioned, and also agriculture secretary and veterans affairs secretary.
For more on how this has happened--and why it's legal--you can read the article:
http://tinyurl.com/3e3duz
***
From a NYTimes article:
"With only 15 months left in office, President Bush has left whole agencies of the executive branch to be run largely by acting or interim appointees — jobs that would normally be filled by people whose nominations would have been reviewed and confirmed by the Senate." These positions include:
1. at the Justice Dept., acting Attorney General Peter D. Keisler AND the no. 2 and 3 postions, currently filled by Deputy Attorney General Craig S. Morford and Associate Attorney General Gregory G. Katsas. Also the heads of the department’s civil rights, natural resources and tax divisions are all acting, as are the directors of the elite Office of Legal Counsel and the Office of Legal Policy. And more than one-fourth of the 93 United States attorneys around the country are "temporary"--unconfirmed by the Senate.
2. At Homeland Security: an acting general counsel, acting under secretary for national protection, and acting assistant secretary for strategic plans.
3. At the Department of Health and Human Services, the $600 billion-a-year Medicare and Medicaid programs have had an acting administrator since last fall.
4. At the State Department, the under secretary for arms control and international security.
5. The vacancies include three members of the president's cabinet--the attorney general, as mentioned, and also agriculture secretary and veterans affairs secretary.
For more on how this has happened--and why it's legal--you can read the article:
http://tinyurl.com/3e3duz
longhorn said:
The Walk On By method works, and if all the libs who hang out there would only practice it, the asylum escapees would go away or (and this would be even better) banned. ;)
Yes I agree. We tried that yesterday at the suggestion of XXX. It didnt even last two hours before one of the "lib" arguers broke the pledge. And most of the worst "libs" didnt even take the bet.
This is beyond lib and con. This is nuts. And pointless, since the PTB in Topeka dont even read it anymore.
And what would be the harm if we sane folks abandoned the blog and it went back to the way it was during the boycott? There are plenty of wingnut blogs like freeperville, townhall, etc. The wingnuts read them and no one else does.
I think that is the ultimate fate of the WEBlog. It will become another townhall, and only wingnuts will read it. So what? They already talk to themselves and only listen to themselves.
I think the libs just make themselves look bad, and by extention, all libs look bad, when they respond to this nut.
And does anyone but me think max might be tippy? They sure rant about the same things in the same style. And accusing cosmos of being a terrorist and implying he/she might do harm to coal plants is just over the top.
But then, rationality has NEVER been their thing...
Yes I agree. We tried that yesterday at the suggestion of XXX. It didnt even last two hours before one of the "lib" arguers broke the pledge. And most of the worst "libs" didnt even take the bet.
This is beyond lib and con. This is nuts. And pointless, since the PTB in Topeka dont even read it anymore.
And what would be the harm if we sane folks abandoned the blog and it went back to the way it was during the boycott? There are plenty of wingnut blogs like freeperville, townhall, etc. The wingnuts read them and no one else does.
I think that is the ultimate fate of the WEBlog. It will become another townhall, and only wingnuts will read it. So what? They already talk to themselves and only listen to themselves.
I think the libs just make themselves look bad, and by extention, all libs look bad, when they respond to this nut.
And does anyone but me think max might be tippy? They sure rant about the same things in the same style. And accusing cosmos of being a terrorist and implying he/she might do harm to coal plants is just over the top.
But then, rationality has NEVER been their thing...
Tracy Phillips said:
Rox, I read that. Yeah you can post or cutnpaste ALMOST anything here.
NO ANN COULTER PLEASE.
I'm not sure who her liberal counterpart would be, but whoever it is, we don't need them either. HA!
Longie, I could really imagine the Topeka crowd reading when we used to be in the mix with some actual thoughtful discussion.
We're not missing a damn thing over there.
Ya know what makes me sick?
There just aren't any really good Kansas blogs out there. The whole freakin' world is gonna judge us Kansas folk by what they read from extreme wingers.
That's what makes me sick.
NO ANN COULTER PLEASE.
I'm not sure who her liberal counterpart would be, but whoever it is, we don't need them either. HA!
Longie, I could really imagine the Topeka crowd reading when we used to be in the mix with some actual thoughtful discussion.
We're not missing a damn thing over there.
Ya know what makes me sick?
There just aren't any really good Kansas blogs out there. The whole freakin' world is gonna judge us Kansas folk by what they read from extreme wingers.
That's what makes me sick.
longhorn said:
Yes, Linda and VT. The entire southeast is suffering from drought. Including Florida if you can imagine that.
But hell no, we'd rather worry about Hillary's hair and fred thompson's wife and mitt romney's dog than address a real issue like water.
And that goes TRIPLE for kansas. Water seems to be a problem that can be pushed off to someone else's watch... until the well goes completely dry. Then there will be INVESTIGATIONS about how it happened and all the PTB will be shocked, SHOCKED I SAY, that no one brought this to their attention sooner.
Wash, rinse, repeat.
But hell no, we'd rather worry about Hillary's hair and fred thompson's wife and mitt romney's dog than address a real issue like water.
And that goes TRIPLE for kansas. Water seems to be a problem that can be pushed off to someone else's watch... until the well goes completely dry. Then there will be INVESTIGATIONS about how it happened and all the PTB will be shocked, SHOCKED I SAY, that no one brought this to their attention sooner.
Wash, rinse, repeat.
Tracy Phillips said:
Longie, send the PTB a linkie, then start sending or posting some editorial stuff.
I imagine there are "staffers" who do nuttin but read blogs.
What a SWEET job.
I imagine there are "staffers" who do nuttin but read blogs.
What a SWEET job.
longhorn said:
Tracy, for the most part I agree about no good Kansas blogs, but I always read my friend Peg's blog. It has lots of "chicken dinner" news, but also lots of good stuff and it is just fun reading. You have to stick with it a while to get to know the players, but I think it comes as close to a Kansas blog as anything.
http://kansasprairie.net/kansasprairieblog/
I guess we are all so broad minded and well read here that our issues go far beyond Kansas. :) Either that, or it is too painful to look and/or discuss...
heheheheheheheheh!
http://kansasprairie.net/kansasprairieblog/
I guess we are all so broad minded and well read here that our issues go far beyond Kansas. :) Either that, or it is too painful to look and/or discuss...
heheheheheheheheh!
longhorn said:
Oh trust me, folks in Topeka DID read the WE blog. I had conversations with folks who said, for no reason and out of the clear blue... "well, I see you attacked sebelius again".
heheheheh. Guess I'm just an equal opportunity offender.
heheheheh. Guess I'm just an equal opportunity offender.
longhorn said:
Good idea Tracy, although most of my PTB friends are gone. The sebelius administration doesnt tolerate liberals any better than the bush administration. But I'll ask Tom. He has better connections now than I do.
I dont know why Tom or Steven or some of the other good libs dont post here. We sure as hell dont always agree with each other over here, so THAT cant be it :)
I dont know why Tom or Steven or some of the other good libs dont post here. We sure as hell dont always agree with each other over here, so THAT cant be it :)
longhorn said:
Maybe we could lure them here with fried chicken? The way to a kansan's heart is through their tummy? heheheh! Probably truer now than we'd like to admit.
lindainks55 said:
As I stated on the donut open, the saddest part about the insanity that truly does appear to represent Kansans is that it is done in the name of god. All the while yelling loudly about personal responsibility.
lindainks55 said:
Once in an email exchange with Tom I invited him here and he said he might stop by but really did like WEBlog. Of course he has been busy lately and the blog he liked disappeared while he was being busy.
longhorn said:
True Linda, when I told him I would be posting less, he was sad and didnt want us to leave. I know he is VERY busy 'cause the wingnuts are already busy plotting against the LGBT community, but I also know he has gotten disgusted with the trolls.
I think all of us liked the perceived visibility of the WE blog, but I think that's gone now that so many readers and posters have left.
I think all of us liked the perceived visibility of the WE blog, but I think that's gone now that so many readers and posters have left.
Rox said:
The problem with letting the disrupters have the blog is that new readers will believe there is no alternative view in this area of the state. And we know that's not true.
LH, I hadn't given any thought to Max being Tippy, but it's a possibility. And Max is getting nastier with each post. Following Kansas/JM's example isn't doing him/her any good.
A friend and I found that killing them with kindness works well, when faced with ranting fools. ;) It makes them look as stupid as they are.
LH, I hadn't given any thought to Max being Tippy, but it's a possibility. And Max is getting nastier with each post. Following Kansas/JM's example isn't doing him/her any good.
A friend and I found that killing them with kindness works well, when faced with ranting fools. ;) It makes them look as stupid as they are.
Vaughn Tolle said:
A little people observation. Having spent most of yesterday with my family, I can say, lh, that at least my relatives get it concerning the water issue. They are quite concerned about what they see with the ethanol plants, the two coal fired plants proposed for Holcomb, etc. They notice the diminished water supply issues. It is likely that they, being a bit closer to agriculture in general, are a bit more sensitive than those of us around Wichita and further East to the situation.
Yes, they are enjoying the higher prices for corn and wheat; they also acknowledge that it's fool's gold. I spent over an hour with two of my brothers discussing the entirety of the issue of water. While it is my understanding that none of them are personally facing any water shortages, they see the big irrigators and the plants of various kinds as water guzzlers, who are holding the cards in the political hand right now.
One of my sisters-in-law's family runs a dairy operation, so the higher cost of feed has a direct impact upon them. The matriarch of the family bent my ear for twenty minutes on this topic, as if I had some magic answer in my hip pocket. My uncle (by marriage) is involved in the insurance business (commercial properties); he's concerned about the situation in Western Kansas arising from the diminishing water supplies (OK, not altruistic, but recognizing that as folks are forced to leave that part of the state and no one replacing them due to, among other things, a depletion of water reserves, this leaves the properties upon which premiums are collected at risk) and wonders out loud if there's any future "out West".
I am aware that we're just a few folks in the grand scheme of things, but surely there are those like lh who live there and see daily what's going on, and (here goes my idealism) I'd think there could be enough of a movement to replace those who represent the area in the legislature, etc., so something could be done. Oops, I forgot; there's no one in the wings who will challenge the incumbents.
Meanwhile, I've a niece who teaches; she is now at her fourth school in four years. She's at Stockton this year, hoping that the enrollment there stays at a level that her job doesn't become threatened for another year or two. As a music teacher, she's "surplus", so when the enrollments decline, she's gone first (as has happened at her prior jobs; she was "replaced" after a fashion at one school by a teacher holding dual certification; at the other two, the music program has been eliminated in essence).
Yes, they are enjoying the higher prices for corn and wheat; they also acknowledge that it's fool's gold. I spent over an hour with two of my brothers discussing the entirety of the issue of water. While it is my understanding that none of them are personally facing any water shortages, they see the big irrigators and the plants of various kinds as water guzzlers, who are holding the cards in the political hand right now.
One of my sisters-in-law's family runs a dairy operation, so the higher cost of feed has a direct impact upon them. The matriarch of the family bent my ear for twenty minutes on this topic, as if I had some magic answer in my hip pocket. My uncle (by marriage) is involved in the insurance business (commercial properties); he's concerned about the situation in Western Kansas arising from the diminishing water supplies (OK, not altruistic, but recognizing that as folks are forced to leave that part of the state and no one replacing them due to, among other things, a depletion of water reserves, this leaves the properties upon which premiums are collected at risk) and wonders out loud if there's any future "out West".
I am aware that we're just a few folks in the grand scheme of things, but surely there are those like lh who live there and see daily what's going on, and (here goes my idealism) I'd think there could be enough of a movement to replace those who represent the area in the legislature, etc., so something could be done. Oops, I forgot; there's no one in the wings who will challenge the incumbents.
Meanwhile, I've a niece who teaches; she is now at her fourth school in four years. She's at Stockton this year, hoping that the enrollment there stays at a level that her job doesn't become threatened for another year or two. As a music teacher, she's "surplus", so when the enrollments decline, she's gone first (as has happened at her prior jobs; she was "replaced" after a fashion at one school by a teacher holding dual certification; at the other two, the music program has been eliminated in essence).
Vaughn Tolle said:
Although, in "fairness", she lost her second job not only because of enrollment decline but also because she informed the daughter of the president of the local school board that as she couldn't carry a tune in a bushel basket, there was no way she (the daughter) was going to be "first chair" clarinet nor, unless she did her practicing, theory work, etc., would she be receiving any grade better than a "D" in instrumental music. I admire her honesty, but she needed to be a bit more diplomatic.
longhorn said:
Good points all VT. The plants and irrigators hold all the cards right now for one reason. Money. Cant run for office without money, and then if they win? They are doomed to do the master's bidding.
And no, there is no economic future out here. Have I mentioned the "airstream" scenario?
And Rox: "The problem with letting the disrupters have the blog is that new readers will believe there is no alternative view in this area of the state. And we know that's not true."
So we really know that isnt true? I mean, there are a handful of us, but I think there is no SIGNIFICANT or effective alternative view in the state.
Sorry. I know I sound pessimistic today, but saddly, I think I'm really just realistic. The future for Kansas, absent a MAJOR course correction, is not a happy picture.
And irony of irony, it WILL trickle down, or up, to the larger communities and eastern Kansas. Someone will pay the bill for shutting down half the state. And it wont be us who are shut down.
And no, there is no economic future out here. Have I mentioned the "airstream" scenario?
And Rox: "The problem with letting the disrupters have the blog is that new readers will believe there is no alternative view in this area of the state. And we know that's not true."
So we really know that isnt true? I mean, there are a handful of us, but I think there is no SIGNIFICANT or effective alternative view in the state.
Sorry. I know I sound pessimistic today, but saddly, I think I'm really just realistic. The future for Kansas, absent a MAJOR course correction, is not a happy picture.
And irony of irony, it WILL trickle down, or up, to the larger communities and eastern Kansas. Someone will pay the bill for shutting down half the state. And it wont be us who are shut down.
longhorn said:
And with all due respect VT, I think the "diplomacy" thing is highly overrated. I agree that diplomacy is a good thing, but there are only so many ways to sugar coat the truth. In the end, the truth is still the truth, and it is the TRUTH that the PTB hate.
No matter how it's sweetened or dressed up...
No matter how it's sweetened or dressed up...
longhorn said:
...and OT...
GOD DAMN it's cold here! I think it's going to freeze tonight, at least a little bit. They are predicting 36 degrees overnight in Hill City. That means that here in the lowlands of the Downer Creek and Smoky Hill valleys, it's gonna freeze.
It could be a three cat night...
GOD DAMN it's cold here! I think it's going to freeze tonight, at least a little bit. They are predicting 36 degrees overnight in Hill City. That means that here in the lowlands of the Downer Creek and Smoky Hill valleys, it's gonna freeze.
It could be a three cat night...
longhorn said:
Sorry I'm ranting on two threads today. Donuts and insanity just bring that out in me. Maybe it's time for bacon and eggs. :)
Vaughn Tolle said:
Yep, lh, you are correct. The PTB don't like the truth; and I guess my niece was more correct than I in that regard, namely, don't sugar coat it, just flat come out and say it.
longhorn said:
I promise, only one more thing.
VT, I think the price of wheat has little to do with irrigation or the ethanol boom. Corn, yes, but wheat, only to the extent that wheat acreage is taken out of production in favor of planing corn. And that wont show up until next year's crop. The estimates for the current crop are all dropping like a stone, with the drought in wheat producing areas of Australia setting the tone.
Worldwide, wheat stocks are waaaaaaayyyyyy down. And that COULD get worse in the new crop year, depending on rainfall and how many acres were shifted to corn/milo/etc. Wheat's been down lately and I suspect it is because of profit taking. The intrinsic value will just continue to increase until the new crop is in. I think the long term trend is for wheat prices to go up, and that aint good for food prices.
VT, I think the price of wheat has little to do with irrigation or the ethanol boom. Corn, yes, but wheat, only to the extent that wheat acreage is taken out of production in favor of planing corn. And that wont show up until next year's crop. The estimates for the current crop are all dropping like a stone, with the drought in wheat producing areas of Australia setting the tone.
Worldwide, wheat stocks are waaaaaaayyyyyy down. And that COULD get worse in the new crop year, depending on rainfall and how many acres were shifted to corn/milo/etc. Wheat's been down lately and I suspect it is because of profit taking. The intrinsic value will just continue to increase until the new crop is in. I think the long term trend is for wheat prices to go up, and that aint good for food prices.
longhorn said:
"I guess my niece was more correct than I in that regard, namely, don't sugar coat it, just flat come out and say it."
Well VT, I dont think any way is more correct than others. Just wanted to point out that when the PTB dont like the message, they always want to whine about how the message was delivered.
Of course, you see how well not sugar coating has worked for me. Hehehehhe. (sad laugh)
Well VT, I dont think any way is more correct than others. Just wanted to point out that when the PTB dont like the message, they always want to whine about how the message was delivered.
Of course, you see how well not sugar coating has worked for me. Hehehehhe. (sad laugh)
longhorn said:
...and fwiw...
The PTB especially dont like the truth when it is delivered by a woman. I had a county commissioner here admit that what I said to him would have been no problem if I were a man.
He said that in a public meeting with 200 people present....
The PTB especially dont like the truth when it is delivered by a woman. I had a county commissioner here admit that what I said to him would have been no problem if I were a man.
He said that in a public meeting with 200 people present....
longhorn said:
I guess I better quit. It's a fine line between rant and self pity. I feel myself slipping.
Danny said:
Ok, I was out all last week, and will likely be that way for the rest of the month. Though I will attempt to come here and read/reply but I can not guarantee it. The next software project is being released and am going to be pretty busy up until and just after its release.
Vaughn Tolle said:
lh, on wheat; agreed that irrigation has little to do with it directly, and that there are shortages, etc. My brothers' take on this in Kansas is the diversion of acreage to irrigated corn vice dry land wheat.
Speaking of water shortages, I just caught a "headline" on cnn.com about the feds transferring water from Georgia to Florida. WTF?
Speaking of water shortages, I just caught a "headline" on cnn.com about the feds transferring water from Georgia to Florida. WTF?
Rox said:
I was wondering last night after the deluge just how much wheat has been planted around here. It won't be there this morning, I know that, especially anything newly planted.
Julie said:
Hi All! It's good to come here and listen and discuss with friends.
I'm recovered from the b-day party. Just in time for Mountain Man's knee replacement surgery this Thursday. He was scheduled for both knees but an infection vetoed that idea so we're gonna do one at a time. He'll be hospitalized for about a week with 2-4 weeks rehab following.
So I'll be single parent at home to 3 lively rambunctious children (Mouse finally let go and is toddling everywhere - the little kitty has taken to burrowing in the sofa to get away from loving hands). And dealing with everything with MM in the hospital - I may open my own sanitarium. Call me for rates. I'll bake a fresh pan of brownies every day.
Keep MM in your thoughts/prayers please.
I'm recovered from the b-day party. Just in time for Mountain Man's knee replacement surgery this Thursday. He was scheduled for both knees but an infection vetoed that idea so we're gonna do one at a time. He'll be hospitalized for about a week with 2-4 weeks rehab following.
So I'll be single parent at home to 3 lively rambunctious children (Mouse finally let go and is toddling everywhere - the little kitty has taken to burrowing in the sofa to get away from loving hands). And dealing with everything with MM in the hospital - I may open my own sanitarium. Call me for rates. I'll bake a fresh pan of brownies every day.
Keep MM in your thoughts/prayers please.
Julie said:
I guess I should have answered the question at hand before going off topic for my issues.
I've lurked over at the old stomping grounds but it's become too much bickering for me. I desire calm and rational discussion not name calling.
Kudo's to those who still post over there - ya'll must have the patience of a saint. I can't be patient enough to those who need things spelled out in small words at this point.
I've lurked over at the old stomping grounds but it's become too much bickering for me. I desire calm and rational discussion not name calling.
Kudo's to those who still post over there - ya'll must have the patience of a saint. I can't be patient enough to those who need things spelled out in small words at this point.
longhorn said:
"I just caught a "headline" on cnn.com about the feds transferring water from Georgia to Florida. WTF?"
HEH vt! That just tells me Florida is in play again as a deciding factor in the O8 presidential election! I
HEH vt! That just tells me Florida is in play again as a deciding factor in the O8 presidential election! I
Rox said:
Julie,
Here's hoping for smooth sailing for MM and for you!
Reserve me a room in that sanitarium, would you?
Here's hoping for smooth sailing for MM and for you!
Reserve me a room in that sanitarium, would you?
longhorn said:
Julie, I'll email ya, but I forgot about MM's surgery. If he wants to talk, I'll be glad to visit with him. Just tell him no matter what, if the operation is successful (and infection is the biggest enemy) he will have NO regrets.
After a year. Hehehe. Until then? Expect him to bitch constantly. If anyone really was honest about how much PAIN is involved during rehab, no one would ever have the deed done.
But now I'm sure glad I did. My shoulders, wrists, neck and other parts may ache, but I have NO knee pain :)
I sure will be sending good thoughts. Especially while he's in the hospital. The care there was, uh, less than stellar, mostly due to understaffing and crappy food. I mean REALLY crappy food. IF my pal Cheezzy hadnt brought be Panara Bread sandwiches, I think I would have died.
Or killed the PT people...
After a year. Hehehe. Until then? Expect him to bitch constantly. If anyone really was honest about how much PAIN is involved during rehab, no one would ever have the deed done.
But now I'm sure glad I did. My shoulders, wrists, neck and other parts may ache, but I have NO knee pain :)
I sure will be sending good thoughts. Especially while he's in the hospital. The care there was, uh, less than stellar, mostly due to understaffing and crappy food. I mean REALLY crappy food. IF my pal Cheezzy hadnt brought be Panara Bread sandwiches, I think I would have died.
Or killed the PT people...
longhorn said:
If no rooms are available at the santiarium, you can always come to Downer Creek for chicken therapy. Both live AND fried.
Rox said:
Oh, and Julie? They only understand 4 letter words over there.
LH, maybe we can simply do away with voting and just let SCOTUS choose the prez.
LH, maybe we can simply do away with voting and just let SCOTUS choose the prez.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Julie, tell MM I'm with him in thought and spirit. Also, if shame becomes needed so he'll do his rehab, let him know my mother (who was age 75 years or so at the time) was able to do it, and complete rehab ahead of schedule, and now says she should have done it much sooner. OK, it was only one knee in her case, but if a 75 year old can get through one, surely he can handle two.
Keep a room reserved for me; and if there isn't one available, chicken therapy sounds like a very good alternative...
Keep a room reserved for me; and if there isn't one available, chicken therapy sounds like a very good alternative...
lindainks55 said:
Julie, can we move rehab to where we can have chicken therapy too? I like the sound of the combination. Not selfish now am I?
longhorn said:
Hee hee heeeeeeeeee Linda.
I got yer rehab right here. Tote them 50lb bags of chicken feed and SCOOP those loads of chicken crap. Then do chicken aerobics by chasing the runaways and trying to herd them back in the coop before the dog and cats know they're out.
Pant pant pant!
Better than We blogging anyway....
I got yer rehab right here. Tote them 50lb bags of chicken feed and SCOOP those loads of chicken crap. Then do chicken aerobics by chasing the runaways and trying to herd them back in the coop before the dog and cats know they're out.
Pant pant pant!
Better than We blogging anyway....
Tracy Phillips said:
I've "been away" for too long, don't know who Tom is.
That's okay, sounds like he likes the atmosphere over there.
Over here most of the time, we're about as threatening and argumentive as kansasprarie.
Hell ya' may even pick up a recipe here if you check in.
That's okay, sounds like he likes the atmosphere over there.
Over here most of the time, we're about as threatening and argumentive as kansasprarie.
Hell ya' may even pick up a recipe here if you check in.
Wendy said:
I know that I simply can't even read there anymore without getting so mad that I see red. And I don't want to get sucked into their madness, so I pretty much try to avoid it. I get sucked in every once in a while, but for the most part it just seems as though it isn't worth the effort.
I like coming here where even if you don't agree with me, you aren't going to start calling me names and telling me I don't know what I am talking about. You RESPECT differing opinions and actually I think in a way like them so that it opens up the lines of debate. That is the kind of atmosphere I am looking for. I just LOVE how I got classes as a liberal and all that fun stuff, no matter how many times I calmly explained that, no, I am not a liberal, I just know how to think for myself.... :)
I like coming here where even if you don't agree with me, you aren't going to start calling me names and telling me I don't know what I am talking about. You RESPECT differing opinions and actually I think in a way like them so that it opens up the lines of debate. That is the kind of atmosphere I am looking for. I just LOVE how I got classes as a liberal and all that fun stuff, no matter how many times I calmly explained that, no, I am not a liberal, I just know how to think for myself.... :)
gster said:
I can't help wondering if "over there" will implode due to the collective stupidity! Several of those people are more than qualified to write permanently for the Opinion Line in the WE.
longhorn said:
Tracy, Tom is the head of the Kansas Equality Coalition and is a friend of mine. He's done lots of political work in Oregon as well as Kansas. He's a great guy, but even he has stopped going over there.
lindainks55 said:
Wendy, I won't speak for others here, but I am waaay more conservative than the current administration in things fiscal and in the size of federal government. The spending like a drunken sailor that has gone on UP UNTIL the Congress had a slightly Democratic majority is shameful and irresponsible! Now, the idiot in charge wants to cut spending with the SCHIP legislation. His welfare has gone to big business more than American people but trust me he is giving away money hand over fist! And, he has grown involvement of government at the federal level more than any prior administration! This administration bears NO resemblance to what has been conservative during my lifetime.
But over there they will defend this administration as having all these conservative values. That's the part I don't understand. When those who profess to be conservative defend this current guy in charge I just have to shake your head in wonder.
When it comes to who is doing what in a relationship between two adults or decisions a woman makes about her body I am very liberal and think it is not the business of government at any level. I respect people who believe differently, we just disagree! On the issue of abortion, those I respect most want life protected at every age not just before birth. The only two people who could endanger my marriage are me and Wayne.
I also don't think god and government are a very good mix. I really think any supreme being would be ashamed of how his / her name is used and angry to be the fall guy for decisions in the name of god. I strongly believe our country was founded so we could have freedom of religion so don't believe Christianity should be more tolerated or encouraged than any other religious belief. I believe the best way to protect my freedom is protect everyone's freedoms.
I grew up around guns. I've even been hunting and skeet shooting. I didn't like it -- the noise and smells weren't to my liking but my Dad loved taking care of his guns, using them, talking about them... He wouldn't have dreamed of strapping one on to wear around the city or everyday life outside hunting and sporting! There are probably some who have good reason to be armed, but Nathan and Hank and those who feel the need to advertise they are carrying are just silly. And, I don't think silly people and guns are a good mix. Most who really need to carry concealed don't let anyone know they carry.
So I think I'm in the middle on much, liberal on some and conservative on some. Oh, and I can support and disagree with a politician of any party. Because the "R" and the "D" aren't what is most important to me.
But over there they will defend this administration as having all these conservative values. That's the part I don't understand. When those who profess to be conservative defend this current guy in charge I just have to shake your head in wonder.
When it comes to who is doing what in a relationship between two adults or decisions a woman makes about her body I am very liberal and think it is not the business of government at any level. I respect people who believe differently, we just disagree! On the issue of abortion, those I respect most want life protected at every age not just before birth. The only two people who could endanger my marriage are me and Wayne.
I also don't think god and government are a very good mix. I really think any supreme being would be ashamed of how his / her name is used and angry to be the fall guy for decisions in the name of god. I strongly believe our country was founded so we could have freedom of religion so don't believe Christianity should be more tolerated or encouraged than any other religious belief. I believe the best way to protect my freedom is protect everyone's freedoms.
I grew up around guns. I've even been hunting and skeet shooting. I didn't like it -- the noise and smells weren't to my liking but my Dad loved taking care of his guns, using them, talking about them... He wouldn't have dreamed of strapping one on to wear around the city or everyday life outside hunting and sporting! There are probably some who have good reason to be armed, but Nathan and Hank and those who feel the need to advertise they are carrying are just silly. And, I don't think silly people and guns are a good mix. Most who really need to carry concealed don't let anyone know they carry.
So I think I'm in the middle on much, liberal on some and conservative on some. Oh, and I can support and disagree with a politician of any party. Because the "R" and the "D" aren't what is most important to me.
lindainks55 said:
Should have been god and government AREN'T a good mix! I need to quit typing and read.
Rox said:
Here, here, Linda! I raise my glass of Pepsi in a toast to your good sense.
I will revise one part though. Those like Nathan and Hank and their guns are not silly, they're deranged. :)
I will revise one part though. Those like Nathan and Hank and their guns are not silly, they're deranged. :)
Wendy said:
Linda,
I agree as well....
I have so many issues with the Bush administration that I don't know if I could even begin to fit them in here. I suppose my biggest is this godforsaken war. Now, I am NOT against war per se. I whole heartedly support our troops because I recognize that they give their lives so that we can sit here in relative comfort typing on these message boards :). But I CANNOT and WILL NOT support our government regarding this war. We were lied to, and now we have gotten stuck in a situation we never should have been in to begin with, with no clear way out save completely reducing Iraq to rubble and leaving them to clean the mess up. And in no way does our country EVER come out looking good in this debacle, because EVERYONE knows the real reason we are there to begin with - and Bush isn't fooling anybody. PLUS - We should be in Afghanistan, going after the man responsible for what Bush is trying to pin on Iraq. And we need to assess even that a little bit. Fighting a war on terror? How totally impossible is that? Now, if you said fighting a war against Al Queda, okay, that's concrete, that's a force we can put the name enemy to and fight against. I think on one of the threads, back when I was still posting over there, I put something along the lines of it is impossible to fight against ideologies - and someone tried to tell me that was all we fight against. Okay, now, I understand that Hitler's ideologies may have formed the Nazi army - but we did not fight Hitler's ideologies, we fought the Nazi's!!! maybe that is generalizing it but you get my point. And that is only the tip of the iceberg as far as my problems with this administration.
I don't think it is my place to tell someone what they should or should not do. And I certainly don't think that it is the government's place to be sticking their nose into things like abortion. I would never personally make that decision, but I am sure as hell not going to stand there and tell someone else they can't. I don't know their story, I don't know what lead them to make that decision, which has to be heart-renching in any circumstance. And I certainly despise people that want to class those women as sluts (ksgrm) because they are pondering it. She has in the past implied that I myself am one, and that I should be more responsible during my "one night stands" as she put it. (for the record, I have NEVER had a one night stand, and my son is the result of a long term relationship) Judgemental people like that just piss me off. And as far as gay marriage, I completely agree Linda - I fail to see how allowing that is "disrupting" the sanctity of marriage. I think it should be allowed - if a church does not want to perform such a ceremony they don't have to, but couples should at LEAST have the option of going down to the courthouse and entering in a legally binding union.
Leave religion out of it. We are all raised to believe different things, and some government shoving a form of Christian religion that I was not raised to believe and that they don't really practice anyways, is bound to lead to nothing but problems. And who got to decide that Christianity was the "right" religion for this country anyways?
I HATE guns. Having a loaded 12 gauge leveled at you by a drunk ex-boyfriend tends to do that to a person. I don't understand the concept of "needing" a gun for protection. I have never felt that I "needed" a gun - even when it was just my son and I living by ourselves in a marginal neighborhood, i never "needed" a gun. And I certainly don't understand the need to carry a gun around at all times. For what? So that on the off chance someone points a gun at you during a robbery you might be able to get your hand on the stupid thing before they shoot you? Seriously.
I think that if we continue to allow our government to operate the way it has been the last 8 years, then, as all those people who tell me I am unpatriotic for being against this damn war, we WILL be in country where women are subordinated and government dictates everything from what we eat to what we wear to what we say - only it won't be a Muslim country, it will be a Christian country... It is time for us to STAND UP and take our country BACK from these people, republican and democrat alike.
I am like you Linda, I don't need to know party affiliation - I need to know what these people STAND for - THAT's how I make my decisions. I admit I tend to lean more democratic because I tend to agree more with their ideologies, but I vote across party lines. I think this country would be a lot better off if we did away with political parties and made people run on their own merits...
I agree as well....
I have so many issues with the Bush administration that I don't know if I could even begin to fit them in here. I suppose my biggest is this godforsaken war. Now, I am NOT against war per se. I whole heartedly support our troops because I recognize that they give their lives so that we can sit here in relative comfort typing on these message boards :). But I CANNOT and WILL NOT support our government regarding this war. We were lied to, and now we have gotten stuck in a situation we never should have been in to begin with, with no clear way out save completely reducing Iraq to rubble and leaving them to clean the mess up. And in no way does our country EVER come out looking good in this debacle, because EVERYONE knows the real reason we are there to begin with - and Bush isn't fooling anybody. PLUS - We should be in Afghanistan, going after the man responsible for what Bush is trying to pin on Iraq. And we need to assess even that a little bit. Fighting a war on terror? How totally impossible is that? Now, if you said fighting a war against Al Queda, okay, that's concrete, that's a force we can put the name enemy to and fight against. I think on one of the threads, back when I was still posting over there, I put something along the lines of it is impossible to fight against ideologies - and someone tried to tell me that was all we fight against. Okay, now, I understand that Hitler's ideologies may have formed the Nazi army - but we did not fight Hitler's ideologies, we fought the Nazi's!!! maybe that is generalizing it but you get my point. And that is only the tip of the iceberg as far as my problems with this administration.
I don't think it is my place to tell someone what they should or should not do. And I certainly don't think that it is the government's place to be sticking their nose into things like abortion. I would never personally make that decision, but I am sure as hell not going to stand there and tell someone else they can't. I don't know their story, I don't know what lead them to make that decision, which has to be heart-renching in any circumstance. And I certainly despise people that want to class those women as sluts (ksgrm) because they are pondering it. She has in the past implied that I myself am one, and that I should be more responsible during my "one night stands" as she put it. (for the record, I have NEVER had a one night stand, and my son is the result of a long term relationship) Judgemental people like that just piss me off. And as far as gay marriage, I completely agree Linda - I fail to see how allowing that is "disrupting" the sanctity of marriage. I think it should be allowed - if a church does not want to perform such a ceremony they don't have to, but couples should at LEAST have the option of going down to the courthouse and entering in a legally binding union.
Leave religion out of it. We are all raised to believe different things, and some government shoving a form of Christian religion that I was not raised to believe and that they don't really practice anyways, is bound to lead to nothing but problems. And who got to decide that Christianity was the "right" religion for this country anyways?
I HATE guns. Having a loaded 12 gauge leveled at you by a drunk ex-boyfriend tends to do that to a person. I don't understand the concept of "needing" a gun for protection. I have never felt that I "needed" a gun - even when it was just my son and I living by ourselves in a marginal neighborhood, i never "needed" a gun. And I certainly don't understand the need to carry a gun around at all times. For what? So that on the off chance someone points a gun at you during a robbery you might be able to get your hand on the stupid thing before they shoot you? Seriously.
I think that if we continue to allow our government to operate the way it has been the last 8 years, then, as all those people who tell me I am unpatriotic for being against this damn war, we WILL be in country where women are subordinated and government dictates everything from what we eat to what we wear to what we say - only it won't be a Muslim country, it will be a Christian country... It is time for us to STAND UP and take our country BACK from these people, republican and democrat alike.
I am like you Linda, I don't need to know party affiliation - I need to know what these people STAND for - THAT's how I make my decisions. I admit I tend to lean more democratic because I tend to agree more with their ideologies, but I vote across party lines. I think this country would be a lot better off if we did away with political parties and made people run on their own merits...
Vaughn Tolle said:
The only time party designation makes any difference to this voter is when it's time to vote in a primary.
lindainks55 said:
And then only because you are forced to vote party lines! Right, Vaughn? Many a primary I've had to decide who I want to vote for most and then register accordingly -- usually best to be registered Republican in Kansas since MOST contested races are between candidates of that party.
Wendy, that old bitty, speaking to you that way is unexcusable! People like that one I wish I could witness when what goes around comes around!
When anyone accuses me of hating bush I can't argue. I think I do. I'm positive I hold him responsible for great harm to America and Americans. In my lifetime I don't remember anyone in the office of POTUS who has done so much damage. I worry about undoing what he has done.
Well, when this ole world comes unglued maybe we can all gather at Downer Creek and I'm sure the work won't seem hard if we're all pitching in Besides I am confident the meals will be worth the efforts! And think of how much I would have the opportunity to learn!
Wendy, that old bitty, speaking to you that way is unexcusable! People like that one I wish I could witness when what goes around comes around!
When anyone accuses me of hating bush I can't argue. I think I do. I'm positive I hold him responsible for great harm to America and Americans. In my lifetime I don't remember anyone in the office of POTUS who has done so much damage. I worry about undoing what he has done.
Well, when this ole world comes unglued maybe we can all gather at Downer Creek and I'm sure the work won't seem hard if we're all pitching in Besides I am confident the meals will be worth the efforts! And think of how much I would have the opportunity to learn!
Rox said:
Quick OT question:
Did anyone see "Legally Blonde, The Musical" last night on MTV? I'm not an MTV watcher, but my youngest was watching, while I was cooking supper. (There should be a collective GASP by all there.) It was...interesting and entertaining. The musical, not supper.
Did anyone see "Legally Blonde, The Musical" last night on MTV? I'm not an MTV watcher, but my youngest was watching, while I was cooking supper. (There should be a collective GASP by all there.) It was...interesting and entertaining. The musical, not supper.
Vaughn Tolle said:
Linda, you are correct.
Rox, didn't see it; don't watch MTV. Your tale of cooking supper reminded me of the telephone call Saturday from the younger who is off the "meal plan" this year, and is in a cooperative cooking situation. She called home Saturday begging her mother to email certain favorite recipes to her so she can "cook", rather than just "prepare" (whatever that distinction is; I think I know, but as it is just a "think", I'll refrain from further comment).
Rox, didn't see it; don't watch MTV. Your tale of cooking supper reminded me of the telephone call Saturday from the younger who is off the "meal plan" this year, and is in a cooperative cooking situation. She called home Saturday begging her mother to email certain favorite recipes to her so she can "cook", rather than just "prepare" (whatever that distinction is; I think I know, but as it is just a "think", I'll refrain from further comment).
Rox said:
Prepare probably equals nuke. Or those really special dishes you mentioned the other day. Mac & cheese and ramen noodles. :)
Speaking of nuking, have I mentioned how great omelets are when made in the microwave?
Speaking of nuking, have I mentioned how great omelets are when made in the microwave?
Rox said:
Re: the insanity "over there"
A few of the threads have become almost civil. Could be because the majority of the problem people aren't interested in the topics. Still, I've posted a few times and have received civil replies from those who weren't earlier.
A few of the threads have become almost civil. Could be because the majority of the problem people aren't interested in the topics. Still, I've posted a few times and have received civil replies from those who weren't earlier.
lindainks55 said:
Funny article about the shenanigans the group in Missouri are using to try and overturn the vote to allow stem cell research which narrowly passed last year. Seems they may need to work harder in order to get the initiative back on the ballot by 2008.
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/10/mis...
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2007/10/mis...
Nathan said:
I find it humorous that many of you claim that this is a place free of the insanity and name calling.
Yet I occasionally look over here and guess what I find today?
A bunch of posts bad mouthing my Father and I.
I find it rather amusing that you choose to hide over here calling my father and I names instead of to our faces.
The only reason this place is any different than the WE Blog is that you have no dissent here.
You are free to call my father and I names and say whatever you want without having to worry about anyone actually challenging what it is you say.
I am quite capable of having logical and reasoned discourse without the name calling.
The problem is that when people question what you say and challenge your posts they are often taken as an attack on you the poster.
I extend the olive branch.
What is it that you want to tell me or expect from me?
Yet I occasionally look over here and guess what I find today?
A bunch of posts bad mouthing my Father and I.
I find it rather amusing that you choose to hide over here calling my father and I names instead of to our faces.
The only reason this place is any different than the WE Blog is that you have no dissent here.
You are free to call my father and I names and say whatever you want without having to worry about anyone actually challenging what it is you say.
I am quite capable of having logical and reasoned discourse without the name calling.
The problem is that when people question what you say and challenge your posts they are often taken as an attack on you the poster.
I extend the olive branch.
What is it that you want to tell me or expect from me?
Nathan said:
"The biggest difference is we have most of the ones capable of thinking here! It's easy for me to get enough of ksgrm, Kansas, Nathan and Hank pretty quickly! I think those left (from BOTH sides) enjoy arguing. Not just arguing but endless arguing with no point to it. They don't seem to be capable of looking at anything from a different perspective, accepting that there may be more than one way to look at an issue or even to have the ability to respect a person who holds a different viewpoint. I can't figure out the appeal!"
Posted By lindainks55 | 10/15/07 8:28 AM
"but Nathan and Hank and those who feel the need to advertise they are carrying are just silly. And, I don't think silly people and guns are a good mix. Most who really need to carry concealed don't let anyone know they carry."
Posted By lindainks55 | 10/15/07 2:55 PM
"I will revise one part though. Those like Nathan and Hank and their guns are not silly, they're deranged. :)"
Posted By Rox | 10/15/07 3:06 PM
Posted By lindainks55 | 10/15/07 8:28 AM
"but Nathan and Hank and those who feel the need to advertise they are carrying are just silly. And, I don't think silly people and guns are a good mix. Most who really need to carry concealed don't let anyone know they carry."
Posted By lindainks55 | 10/15/07 2:55 PM
"I will revise one part though. Those like Nathan and Hank and their guns are not silly, they're deranged. :)"
Posted By Rox | 10/15/07 3:06 PM
Rox said:
No, Nathan, I didn't forget. In fact, I went back to see exactly what I said before I asked. That's not name calling. It is my opinion of people who are obsessed with guns to the point of being paranoid that those guns will be taken away by the government, of people who feel the need to frighten others by making jokes about bringing guns to a social function, just to see the reaction. It was a joke, right? Isn't that what you said?
You don't like my opinion? Tough. It's a free country. You get to keep your guns and your bravado. I get to voice my opinion on that.
And for the record, Nathan, when I call someone a name, you'll know it.
You don't like my opinion? Tough. It's a free country. You get to keep your guns and your bravado. I get to voice my opinion on that.
And for the record, Nathan, when I call someone a name, you'll know it.
Wendy said:
Seriously Nathan? Nobody called you or your Dad names - they made assessments on your character based on statements YOU yourself have made. And I have CERTAINLY seen you behave in the manner which you are bad mouthing people over here... do I need to remind you? If you don't like the things being said, you are free to leave. The beauty of this blog. And there is dissent here. There have been several times that I myself have disagreed with other posters on this blog. The difference is that over here, when someone disagrees with you, they present it in an adult manner - ie - No this is what I think and this is why. They don't shove rhetoric and hate down your throats the way so many posters (and I have seen you do it too, on MANY different threads) over there like to just say no you are wrong and yell and tell you what a horrible person you are because you don't agree with them. I don't appreciate being called a slut or told that I am unpatriotic because I think that this government is wasting the lives of our soldiers on a war we never should have fought (and I have many friends and family in the armed services (Army, Navy and Marines) who feel the same way, thanks) and sorry, but you yourself have made personal attacks on MANY members of this blog before. Perhaps, if you don't want people to make negative characterizations on you, you should stop to think about your actions first... A lesson I learned in GRADE SCHOOL....
Wendy said:
Okay all, I apologize for the rant.
I just get extremely frustrated by people who see only what they want to see and are always "lily white" in their estimations of themselves.
It's that whole people in glass houses thing...
However, I do think my reaction was exactly what he was looking for and I just should have ignored him. After all, that was the whole reason I stopped posting on the other blog.
I just get extremely frustrated by people who see only what they want to see and are always "lily white" in their estimations of themselves.
It's that whole people in glass houses thing...
However, I do think my reaction was exactly what he was looking for and I just should have ignored him. After all, that was the whole reason I stopped posting on the other blog.
Nathan said:
Oh I see...
When you call me names it is justified. But this place is free from the name calling like you said.
I was simply pointing out your hypocrisy.
If you want to pretend like this place is any better you are free to do so. But it is only pretend.
I came here, like I said, to offer the olive branch.
Instead you take the opportunity to rub it into my face even more.
Just don't pretend like you are any better than those at the WE Blog.
The only difference is that you don't have anyone here to call you names back or disagree with you.
The type of disagreement you have here is one of mere degrees. Like a bunch of women at church debating what color to paint the nursery.
When you call me names it is justified. But this place is free from the name calling like you said.
I was simply pointing out your hypocrisy.
If you want to pretend like this place is any better you are free to do so. But it is only pretend.
I came here, like I said, to offer the olive branch.
Instead you take the opportunity to rub it into my face even more.
Just don't pretend like you are any better than those at the WE Blog.
The only difference is that you don't have anyone here to call you names back or disagree with you.
The type of disagreement you have here is one of mere degrees. Like a bunch of women at church debating what color to paint the nursery.
Nathan said:
Gster,
If all you are going to do is patronize me why bother posting at all?
Is that another example of how much better this forum is?
What happened to looking at things from a different perspective? Understanding?
Do you only do that with people you agree with?
If all you are going to do is patronize me why bother posting at all?
Is that another example of how much better this forum is?
What happened to looking at things from a different perspective? Understanding?
Do you only do that with people you agree with?
gster said:
No Nathan, what I'm doing is ignoring you. You surely are used to that by now, I've seen your past comments regarding it. You're irrelevant and simply not worth my time or effort.
Have an average day!
Have an average day!
Wendy said:
Because Nathan, whenever you claim to be extending the olive branch, in the past you have turned right around and bit us on our outstreched hands...
If you would take note - I apologized for the rant. I do not, however apologize for disliking you. That comes solely on the basis of your behavior.
And as I said before, NOBODY called you names! Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Saying something like "nathan is an idiot" would be calling you names. Nobody did that. They made a characterization of your personality based on what YOU yourself have said. If you don't like that characterization it is really up to you to change it.
Again, pot calling the kettle black. You sit there and piously lambast us for hypocrisy, all the while doing the same thing you are accusing us of doing! And I don't think anyone here has said ANYTHING about us being better. I think what we said is that we PREFER to post over here because we know that people will not immediately jump on us screaming and yelling and *gasp* calling us derogatory names, UNLIKE the WE Blog...
If you would take note - I apologized for the rant. I do not, however apologize for disliking you. That comes solely on the basis of your behavior.
And as I said before, NOBODY called you names! Do you have a reading comprehension problem? Saying something like "nathan is an idiot" would be calling you names. Nobody did that. They made a characterization of your personality based on what YOU yourself have said. If you don't like that characterization it is really up to you to change it.
Again, pot calling the kettle black. You sit there and piously lambast us for hypocrisy, all the while doing the same thing you are accusing us of doing! And I don't think anyone here has said ANYTHING about us being better. I think what we said is that we PREFER to post over here because we know that people will not immediately jump on us screaming and yelling and *gasp* calling us derogatory names, UNLIKE the WE Blog...
Nathan said:
Have fun in your little world of pretend.
If you want someone who actually has a different opinion than you do and truely want to understand one you know where to find us.
If you are going to bad mouth me, at least have the intestinal fortitude to do it to my face.
Have fun all.
If you want someone who actually has a different opinion than you do and truely want to understand one you know where to find us.
If you are going to bad mouth me, at least have the intestinal fortitude to do it to my face.
Have fun all.
Nathan said:
Wendy,
Whether you are simply calling me an idiot or characterizing me as one is a matter of semantics.
I am not claiming that I don't call people names. I routinely do. It is usually only after they have said something about me. And 99% of the time I never say anything truely mean or vulgar.
As I said before, I am quite capable of having a well reasoned and logical discussion free from the name calling.
I quite frequently do.
I am not even sure what it was that happened between all of us that has caused such hate and discontent for me.
I have offered on several occasions to make amends.
I still offer that now.
My intent in coming here was two fold.
One, to point out that you were bad mouthing my father and I (essentially behind our backs) while claiming this is such a better place free from name calling.
Two, to truly extend the olive branch. To offer you a chance to tell me what your problem with me is AND give me a chance to rectify it.
If you are not interested in number 2, fine. Number 1 is still ture.
Whether you are simply calling me an idiot or characterizing me as one is a matter of semantics.
I am not claiming that I don't call people names. I routinely do. It is usually only after they have said something about me. And 99% of the time I never say anything truely mean or vulgar.
As I said before, I am quite capable of having a well reasoned and logical discussion free from the name calling.
I quite frequently do.
I am not even sure what it was that happened between all of us that has caused such hate and discontent for me.
I have offered on several occasions to make amends.
I still offer that now.
My intent in coming here was two fold.
One, to point out that you were bad mouthing my father and I (essentially behind our backs) while claiming this is such a better place free from name calling.
Two, to truly extend the olive branch. To offer you a chance to tell me what your problem with me is AND give me a chance to rectify it.
If you are not interested in number 2, fine. Number 1 is still ture.
Wendy said:
Nathan,
First of all, point out to me where I EVER said anything about you OR your father in any of my previous posts which would have relevance to the statements that you are making.
Secondly - in your posts - the first one really has no relevance, as if you read Linda's first post, yes she mentions you by name, but then goes on to say "those on BOTH sides". So how that is name calling you I miss it. Her second post does mention you specifically, but along with that she says "those like you" and thirdly, Rox's post also say "those like Nathan and Hank". It isn't a matter of semantics. But if that is what you want to believe that is your perogative I suppose.
Third, I would like for you to find me a post where I EVER called you a name. You have called me several. I have never call you a name unless it has been in response to a personal attack you have made on me.
Four - well three covers a lot of my problem with you. Your absolute failure to treat anyone who disagrees with you with any respect is another one of my issues with you. I have no problem with differing opinions. But for you to come here and say that I am close minded and unwilling to accept anyone else's opinon is laughable. At least I am willing to listen! And then point out what my issue with that opinion is. I am not afraid to admit when I am wrong. HOWEVER, I don't think you can be wrong in your OPINION. You may be able to be wrong in your FACTS - but opinions are based solely on the person and not on much else. For instance, Danny and I disagree the matter of abortion. Vaughn and I have disagreed on schooling issues. The list can go on... But it never resorts to Danny calling me a slut or a whore or Vaughn telling me I am stupid. THAT is what I have experienced "over there" and that is why I don't post there any longer. Here I can find civility. And when I behave badly, I admit it, as in my apology above.
If you really don't get why people have such a negative opinion of you, I am afraid that there is nothing that I can do to change that. Pointing out to you our issue with you is not going to resolve the matter, because it has already been done. You chose to dismiss that is irrelevant.
I personally don't like the whole "ignore" method. But neither am I going to sit hear and beat a dead horse.
First of all, point out to me where I EVER said anything about you OR your father in any of my previous posts which would have relevance to the statements that you are making.
Secondly - in your posts - the first one really has no relevance, as if you read Linda's first post, yes she mentions you by name, but then goes on to say "those on BOTH sides". So how that is name calling you I miss it. Her second post does mention you specifically, but along with that she says "those like you" and thirdly, Rox's post also say "those like Nathan and Hank". It isn't a matter of semantics. But if that is what you want to believe that is your perogative I suppose.
Third, I would like for you to find me a post where I EVER called you a name. You have called me several. I have never call you a name unless it has been in response to a personal attack you have made on me.
Four - well three covers a lot of my problem with you. Your absolute failure to treat anyone who disagrees with you with any respect is another one of my issues with you. I have no problem with differing opinions. But for you to come here and say that I am close minded and unwilling to accept anyone else's opinon is laughable. At least I am willing to listen! And then point out what my issue with that opinion is. I am not afraid to admit when I am wrong. HOWEVER, I don't think you can be wrong in your OPINION. You may be able to be wrong in your FACTS - but opinions are based solely on the person and not on much else. For instance, Danny and I disagree the matter of abortion. Vaughn and I have disagreed on schooling issues. The list can go on... But it never resorts to Danny calling me a slut or a whore or Vaughn telling me I am stupid. THAT is what I have experienced "over there" and that is why I don't post there any longer. Here I can find civility. And when I behave badly, I admit it, as in my apology above.
If you really don't get why people have such a negative opinion of you, I am afraid that there is nothing that I can do to change that. Pointing out to you our issue with you is not going to resolve the matter, because it has already been done. You chose to dismiss that is irrelevant.
I personally don't like the whole "ignore" method. But neither am I going to sit hear and beat a dead horse.
Danny said:
All,
The only real complaint I have is my perception that sometimes people ignore what is said or don't fully read what was typed. I'm to be accused of this myself at times. I don't try to persecute anyone because of a belief they hold, whether I agree with their opinion or not. In that sense, I guess I am tolerant of others and their accepted beliefs. Though as Wendy pointed out: we have differing views on abortion and whether it should be legal, we might actually hold the same ideals on how to lessen its impact(address the reasons an abortion is sought).
However, abortion isn't the only thing I've disagreed with others about here: Vaughn and I disagree on the what the Visioneering Group has for a goals and the importance those may or may not hold. However, we might agree on not liking all the ways they want to get them(tax money being spent, for instance). I think it is good to have goals to want to work toward, and in that sense I think that the Visioneering group has brought goals, lofty and ill-conceived as they may be to some, goals are good to have it means we have something to want to try for.
And there are other issues I disagree with. However, in listening to those I disagree with I examine more closely why I disagree, and then decide perhaps I was wrong. If I come to the conclusion I am not wrong, then I'll examine what steps can I take to end that which I am against, or support that which I am for to take one argument away from those who disagree with me.
Read my blog against abortion, it isn't perfect it was a synopsis of a paper I had written, nothing published and perhaps sometime I'll post the whole thing, but we'll see about that.
My closing thought: I think sometimes when someone disagrees with someone else, especially in a forum where emotions and body language can not be seen or heard, we take what was typed more personally, because we inject our own emotion into what we read. This in turn, then takes something that perhaps wasn't meant as a personal attack but truly an attack on an idea and makes it personal and then everything begins to break down.
I'm guilty of taking things personally that were never meant to be. Ultimately, it is what everybody has to realize. When talking about very heated topics: abortion, war, etc. we are likely to take things personal because we believe we are right and that any attack on our belief is made to become a personal attack, whether or not it was meant to be.
So in answer, why do I like it here? Because I can have a differing opinion and while I'm sure some really disagree with me, I think that for the most part we've come to the realization of what I've said in that last paragraph and we try to not take everything personally but that sometimes others who disagree with us are just as passionate about their belief as well.
The only real complaint I have is my perception that sometimes people ignore what is said or don't fully read what was typed. I'm to be accused of this myself at times. I don't try to persecute anyone because of a belief they hold, whether I agree with their opinion or not. In that sense, I guess I am tolerant of others and their accepted beliefs. Though as Wendy pointed out: we have differing views on abortion and whether it should be legal, we might actually hold the same ideals on how to lessen its impact(address the reasons an abortion is sought).
However, abortion isn't the only thing I've disagreed with others about here: Vaughn and I disagree on the what the Visioneering Group has for a goals and the importance those may or may not hold. However, we might agree on not liking all the ways they want to get them(tax money being spent, for instance). I think it is good to have goals to want to work toward, and in that sense I think that the Visioneering group has brought goals, lofty and ill-conceived as they may be to some, goals are good to have it means we have something to want to try for.
And there are other issues I disagree with. However, in listening to those I disagree with I examine more closely why I disagree, and then decide perhaps I was wrong. If I come to the conclusion I am not wrong, then I'll examine what steps can I take to end that which I am against, or support that which I am for to take one argument away from those who disagree with me.
Read my blog against abortion, it isn't perfect it was a synopsis of a paper I had written, nothing published and perhaps sometime I'll post the whole thing, but we'll see about that.
My closing thought: I think sometimes when someone disagrees with someone else, especially in a forum where emotions and body language can not be seen or heard, we take what was typed more personally, because we inject our own emotion into what we read. This in turn, then takes something that perhaps wasn't meant as a personal attack but truly an attack on an idea and makes it personal and then everything begins to break down.
I'm guilty of taking things personally that were never meant to be. Ultimately, it is what everybody has to realize. When talking about very heated topics: abortion, war, etc. we are likely to take things personal because we believe we are right and that any attack on our belief is made to become a personal attack, whether or not it was meant to be.
So in answer, why do I like it here? Because I can have a differing opinion and while I'm sure some really disagree with me, I think that for the most part we've come to the realization of what I've said in that last paragraph and we try to not take everything personally but that sometimes others who disagree with us are just as passionate about their belief as well.
Nathan said:
Wendy and others,
I don't recall ever calling you names Wendy.
I apologize if I did.
I have also taken back the time I called Linda Stupid. Within a day or two of doing it.
It didn't matter though. Both Linda and WS Clark said very mean things to me. They went beyond calling me names.
I do sometimes say someone is ignorant or stupid for the things they post. It is not right. I don't try to say it is. I occasionally get riled up and go too far.
When I did to Linda, I apologized and took it back.
But that wasn't enough.
I know why several of you don't like me. What I don't understand is your inability to forgive and move on.
Here we are months later and people here are still bad mouthing me. You can sugar coat it or justify it or try to explain it however you want to. Posters here purposefully chose my name and my fathers name to say bad things about us. All this while claiming this blog is somehow civil and free of name calling.
If you don't see the hypocrisy, so be it.
I voice my opinions very bluntly. If you say something I disagree with I will tell you and why.
It seems as if some of you are unable to tell the difference between disagreement and a personal attack.
Oh well. I have said my piece. If you want to continue on in life not liking me that is fine.
I simply don't have enough time in my life to harbor grudges against people.
I apologize that things ended the way they did and for any trouble I caused you.
God Bless You all
Nathan
I don't recall ever calling you names Wendy.
I apologize if I did.
I have also taken back the time I called Linda Stupid. Within a day or two of doing it.
It didn't matter though. Both Linda and WS Clark said very mean things to me. They went beyond calling me names.
I do sometimes say someone is ignorant or stupid for the things they post. It is not right. I don't try to say it is. I occasionally get riled up and go too far.
When I did to Linda, I apologized and took it back.
But that wasn't enough.
I know why several of you don't like me. What I don't understand is your inability to forgive and move on.
Here we are months later and people here are still bad mouthing me. You can sugar coat it or justify it or try to explain it however you want to. Posters here purposefully chose my name and my fathers name to say bad things about us. All this while claiming this blog is somehow civil and free of name calling.
If you don't see the hypocrisy, so be it.
I voice my opinions very bluntly. If you say something I disagree with I will tell you and why.
It seems as if some of you are unable to tell the difference between disagreement and a personal attack.
Oh well. I have said my piece. If you want to continue on in life not liking me that is fine.
I simply don't have enough time in my life to harbor grudges against people.
I apologize that things ended the way they did and for any trouble I caused you.
God Bless You all
Nathan
Wendy said:
Nathan,
My only argument with your post is this:
Granted, I stuck my nose in where it didn't belong. However, having read Linda and Rox's post from a third party viewpoint, I in NO WAY took them as a personal assault on you, and that is why I told you nobody was "name calling" and proceeded to get pulled in to semantics. BUT, I never made any mention of you OR your father in any of my posts until you started painting me with the same brush. And even then, it was not a direct "assault" but an example.
I guess my major problem with you Nathan, and with many people "OT", is the WAY in which you speak to people on the blogs. You are very condescending, to the point of being rude sometimes, and quite frankly, I don't like people who talk "down" to me.
I have been through quite enough in my life, thank you, that I don't need some person I don't even know belittling my choices or my opinions. You want to disagree with me? That's fine. Do it politely, and I will be happy to listen. But when you start a disagreement by telling me I am wrong, like anyone else's natural instinct, I am going to fight back. And when you move into name calling and veiled derogatory insults, well, that is where I draw the line.
As I said before, there are plenty of people on this blog I disagree with. In fact, at pretty much some point, I can guarantee you someone said something I did not agree with, be it Danny and our difference of opinion on abortion, or Vaughn and our difference of opinion as to the right kinds of schools, to longhorn and (she may not know it) our difference of opinion regarding the Catholic religion. I respect every single one of their rights to hold their opinion. I listen to what they say. If I think it is a topic worth debating, I will pose my opinion to them. We discuss, either agree to disagree, or one or the other changes our opinon, and we move on. Not one single person on this blog has EVER said anything deliberatly insulting, degrading or rude to me. I cannot say the same for the WEBlog. And I have a very difficult time dealing with people who have been insulting to me in the past. Because I tend to expect that behavior from them, it makes it hard to see any other type of behavior they have.
My only argument with your post is this:
Granted, I stuck my nose in where it didn't belong. However, having read Linda and Rox's post from a third party viewpoint, I in NO WAY took them as a personal assault on you, and that is why I told you nobody was "name calling" and proceeded to get pulled in to semantics. BUT, I never made any mention of you OR your father in any of my posts until you started painting me with the same brush. And even then, it was not a direct "assault" but an example.
I guess my major problem with you Nathan, and with many people "OT", is the WAY in which you speak to people on the blogs. You are very condescending, to the point of being rude sometimes, and quite frankly, I don't like people who talk "down" to me.
I have been through quite enough in my life, thank you, that I don't need some person I don't even know belittling my choices or my opinions. You want to disagree with me? That's fine. Do it politely, and I will be happy to listen. But when you start a disagreement by telling me I am wrong, like anyone else's natural instinct, I am going to fight back. And when you move into name calling and veiled derogatory insults, well, that is where I draw the line.
As I said before, there are plenty of people on this blog I disagree with. In fact, at pretty much some point, I can guarantee you someone said something I did not agree with, be it Danny and our difference of opinion on abortion, or Vaughn and our difference of opinion as to the right kinds of schools, to longhorn and (she may not know it) our difference of opinion regarding the Catholic religion. I respect every single one of their rights to hold their opinion. I listen to what they say. If I think it is a topic worth debating, I will pose my opinion to them. We discuss, either agree to disagree, or one or the other changes our opinon, and we move on. Not one single person on this blog has EVER said anything deliberatly insulting, degrading or rude to me. I cannot say the same for the WEBlog. And I have a very difficult time dealing with people who have been insulting to me in the past. Because I tend to expect that behavior from them, it makes it hard to see any other type of behavior they have.
Rox said:
Wendy,
I've gotten the same impression regarding the condescending attitude.
Nathan, I'll give you a break. This may be a touch of shyness in person. If you remember, I pointed it out once. But on the blog, it isn't shyness.
Hey, you DID ask.
I've gotten the same impression regarding the condescending attitude.
Nathan, I'll give you a break. This may be a touch of shyness in person. If you remember, I pointed it out once. But on the blog, it isn't shyness.
Hey, you DID ask.
Danny said:
Nathan,
My comment above was directed at no one person, I addressed all because I felt it important to address everybody(including myself). More of my own experiences over there led me to the conclusion of what I typed above, occasionally here as well but that is to be expected on any online forum. So many people(doesn't matter what political, personal, religions, etc leanings they have) get to a point to where name calling occurs because they don't understand their own position, they don't understand their opponents position, or they take it personally(which I think is more often the case). The problem I see, is that people in general take what was typed and impose their own emotion onto it, because we don't know the other person well enough to interpret their emotion.
I'll apologize right now and accept your apology. If you and I can agree to not name call each other, I'm happy to talk to you any time and debate any issues we may disagree with each other about. I don't debate everything here because there are some issues with which I do agree with those of more liberal leanings. However, I will debate and provide my reasons for why I believe certain things are wrong and I'll happily tell anybody why I believe that without, I hope, leading to a personal attack. I'm not going to resort to calling someone a name though because they disagree with me.
I've not personally experienced being called a name on the WEBlog, but I've seen the names flying from everywhere, liberals, conservatives, atheists, religious persons, etc. Doesn't matter, people get into personal attacks all the time over there. I'm not going to say it is perfect here but while it has probably happened it is far less so than on the WEBlog.
You and I probably agree abortion is wrong, but we may disagree on the amount of personal involvement we may need to have in getting it to end or at least be dramatically reduced in its impact. As I said before, take action by taking away the arguments for something.
What do I do? I tutor single parents in math, computers, and physics. Why? Because an often used argument is that children interfere with education, which in turn can really hurt ones chances for a good paying career. I don't consider this much, others here disagree with me, but if every pro-life person did something similar, how much less of an impact would abortion have at that point? Hell, how much better would our country be as a result of people helping people?
It isn't about politics its about volunteering to help someone else less fortunate through choices they've made and not judging them for those choices and then ultimately taking away one argument for something I'm against. This is how I was raised, it isn't my place to judge someone else(love the sinner hate the sin), and how I was taught about what religion I follow(Catholic for those interested).
I've stated why I am against abortion on my own blog, and I've stated what I do as a result. I encourage the parents to bring their child(ren) with them. It sets an example to their child(ren) that school is important.
My comment above was directed at no one person, I addressed all because I felt it important to address everybody(including myself). More of my own experiences over there led me to the conclusion of what I typed above, occasionally here as well but that is to be expected on any online forum. So many people(doesn't matter what political, personal, religions, etc leanings they have) get to a point to where name calling occurs because they don't understand their own position, they don't understand their opponents position, or they take it personally(which I think is more often the case). The problem I see, is that people in general take what was typed and impose their own emotion onto it, because we don't know the other person well enough to interpret their emotion.
I'll apologize right now and accept your apology. If you and I can agree to not name call each other, I'm happy to talk to you any time and debate any issues we may disagree with each other about. I don't debate everything here because there are some issues with which I do agree with those of more liberal leanings. However, I will debate and provide my reasons for why I believe certain things are wrong and I'll happily tell anybody why I believe that without, I hope, leading to a personal attack. I'm not going to resort to calling someone a name though because they disagree with me.
I've not personally experienced being called a name on the WEBlog, but I've seen the names flying from everywhere, liberals, conservatives, atheists, religious persons, etc. Doesn't matter, people get into personal attacks all the time over there. I'm not going to say it is perfect here but while it has probably happened it is far less so than on the WEBlog.
You and I probably agree abortion is wrong, but we may disagree on the amount of personal involvement we may need to have in getting it to end or at least be dramatically reduced in its impact. As I said before, take action by taking away the arguments for something.
What do I do? I tutor single parents in math, computers, and physics. Why? Because an often used argument is that children interfere with education, which in turn can really hurt ones chances for a good paying career. I don't consider this much, others here disagree with me, but if every pro-life person did something similar, how much less of an impact would abortion have at that point? Hell, how much better would our country be as a result of people helping people?
It isn't about politics its about volunteering to help someone else less fortunate through choices they've made and not judging them for those choices and then ultimately taking away one argument for something I'm against. This is how I was raised, it isn't my place to judge someone else(love the sinner hate the sin), and how I was taught about what religion I follow(Catholic for those interested).
I've stated why I am against abortion on my own blog, and I've stated what I do as a result. I encourage the parents to bring their child(ren) with them. It sets an example to their child(ren) that school is important.
Rox said:
I'm going to post on the Say It...Say It! thread. Starting fresh on this topic, so to speak. :)
Wendy said:
See Danny, I agree with most of your points. I kind of have the same attitude. While I personally feel abortion is wrong, having been in that position (and no, it was not a decision I ever considered, but having been in the having a child without the support of a partner) I KNOW how difficult that choice must be. I will not belittle those women because I do not know the circumstances behind their decisions. For instance, I cannot help but imagine how terrifying it would to be raped and then find out you were pregnant. Talk abou the ultimate violation. What kind of decision would I make in that situation? I can't say. But people who throw out the word adoption like its a new fad just make me angry. Yeah, that is great in concept. The REALITY is MUCH MUCH different. I agree that education is the way to go Danny. Teach the children about the consequences of their actions. Provide methods for safe sex (becuase let's be honest - you can preach abstinence all you want, but most kids aren't going to practice it), do these types of things and reduce teh NEED for abortions, and then it won't be such an issue. But neither do I want to see abortion outlawed, because to me, ultimately it is that woman's body and her decision, and you know what? Whatever decision she makes, she is going to face a greater power than you or I and have to explain herself then. She doesn't need to have to do that now...
Rox said:
Oh, dear, back again. Blame Wendy. :)
Do I need to say I agree? I didn't think so. :)
Here's another "personal story" and ties in with the homosexual testing thread OT.
I was 38 when I learned I was pregnant with my 4th. Obviously this was a surprise. :) Because of my age, my doctor asked if I wanted any genetic testing done. Knowing older mothers are more prone to having babies with Down Syndrome, I thought about it and realized it wouldn't matter, one way or the other. I knew that if I knew there was a problem, I wouldn't turn to abortion. I declined the testing.
As soon as my daughter was born, she was whisked away to the other side of the delivery room. I knew something was wrong. Later that night, a doctor visited to tell me that there was a cranial problem. She didn't have a soft spot and would need surgery within very little time. He also told me that, at first, the nurses had suspected Down Syndrome. Testing would not have revealed the cranial problem, and he assured me that it was not caused by anything I had done or not done. 2 months later, she had the surgery and all was well.
BTW, she turned 18 a week ago today.
Do I need to say I agree? I didn't think so. :)
Here's another "personal story" and ties in with the homosexual testing thread OT.
I was 38 when I learned I was pregnant with my 4th. Obviously this was a surprise. :) Because of my age, my doctor asked if I wanted any genetic testing done. Knowing older mothers are more prone to having babies with Down Syndrome, I thought about it and realized it wouldn't matter, one way or the other. I knew that if I knew there was a problem, I wouldn't turn to abortion. I declined the testing.
As soon as my daughter was born, she was whisked away to the other side of the delivery room. I knew something was wrong. Later that night, a doctor visited to tell me that there was a cranial problem. She didn't have a soft spot and would need surgery within very little time. He also told me that, at first, the nurses had suspected Down Syndrome. Testing would not have revealed the cranial problem, and he assured me that it was not caused by anything I had done or not done. 2 months later, she had the surgery and all was well.
BTW, she turned 18 a week ago today.
Danny said:
Wendy and Rox,
Well, I can provide a not personal but family related story. My aunt had an abortion when she was younger and unmarried. The reason, in her own words, made sense at the time. She regrets it now, but she is the reason I don't judge someone who has had one, that is why I have said in other posts it would be hypocritical of me to judge. What's the point in judging someone anyway? How many of us has made a bad decision in our lives? I'd vote every single person has made one, but in all honesty most people will learn something from it.
Ultimately, I don't blame the mother, I do think the provider of the service may not always be forth coming about alternatives though. Find me someone who is forth coming about alternatives when it is their own service or livelihood that depends on the service they provide being performed.
Wendy,
I happen to agree, throwing the term adoption around as if it magically solves problems without being willing to adopt seems to water down the words and make them less worthy. Sure, there may be several people willing to adopt, but apparently not enough, right?
I'm willing to adopt, but being willing to adopt and actually adopting are two different things. One is words, one is action. My wife and I have discussed it and it isn't the right time at the moment. We both think that it may be a good idea to adopt and I'll give this a 90% probability that in 5 to 10 years we will have adopted a child, again putting action to words.
I just think it comes down to, this is where and when I live and if I can affect change in the larger picture by affecting change within myself, then all the better. Change the world by changing the self. It is one of the qualms I have with the larger pro-life movement, they want to affect a change without addressing the problems themselves. So, I'll be pro-life and address what problems I can and affect change within myself and hope that eventually this leads to change throughout the whole.
Well, I can provide a not personal but family related story. My aunt had an abortion when she was younger and unmarried. The reason, in her own words, made sense at the time. She regrets it now, but she is the reason I don't judge someone who has had one, that is why I have said in other posts it would be hypocritical of me to judge. What's the point in judging someone anyway? How many of us has made a bad decision in our lives? I'd vote every single person has made one, but in all honesty most people will learn something from it.
Ultimately, I don't blame the mother, I do think the provider of the service may not always be forth coming about alternatives though. Find me someone who is forth coming about alternatives when it is their own service or livelihood that depends on the service they provide being performed.
Wendy,
I happen to agree, throwing the term adoption around as if it magically solves problems without being willing to adopt seems to water down the words and make them less worthy. Sure, there may be several people willing to adopt, but apparently not enough, right?
I'm willing to adopt, but being willing to adopt and actually adopting are two different things. One is words, one is action. My wife and I have discussed it and it isn't the right time at the moment. We both think that it may be a good idea to adopt and I'll give this a 90% probability that in 5 to 10 years we will have adopted a child, again putting action to words.
I just think it comes down to, this is where and when I live and if I can affect change in the larger picture by affecting change within myself, then all the better. Change the world by changing the self. It is one of the qualms I have with the larger pro-life movement, they want to affect a change without addressing the problems themselves. So, I'll be pro-life and address what problems I can and affect change within myself and hope that eventually this leads to change throughout the whole.
Rox said:
Danny,
I have friends on both sides of the abortion/adoption issue. Some have relinquished babies for adoption, another had an abortion. Those who opted for adoption also have regrets. As an adoptee myself, I know there are always questions. I belonged to a "triad" group (adoptees, adoptive parents, and birth parents) here in Wichita over 20 years ago. It gave me the opportunity to see all sides of it. It isn't easy for any of us/them.
My friend who had an abortion did so for several reasons. She was very young, had very little money, and it was discovered that she had contracted German measles. The father was not in the picture. According to everyone she talked to (both pro and anti), it was pretty much a given that a baby would have major complications, not only at birth, but throughout life. She had three days of intense counseling and heard all options available. Adoption probably was the weakest of the options because of health concerns. She opted for abortion. She doesn't regret it. I think most do, but in her situation, she felt it best, not only for her, but for a baby she would bring into the world.
I'm not an abortion proponent. I totally disagree with abortion when used as birth control. But each of us has to make a decision that we will live with for the rest of our lives. It doesn't go away. It must be between each individual, their doctor, and their God.
Three of my grandchildren don't have their fathers in their lives. None of my daughters ever considered abortion.
I applaud you for considering adoption. I applaud you for your belief on abortion, because you are helping in some way.
I have friends on both sides of the abortion/adoption issue. Some have relinquished babies for adoption, another had an abortion. Those who opted for adoption also have regrets. As an adoptee myself, I know there are always questions. I belonged to a "triad" group (adoptees, adoptive parents, and birth parents) here in Wichita over 20 years ago. It gave me the opportunity to see all sides of it. It isn't easy for any of us/them.
My friend who had an abortion did so for several reasons. She was very young, had very little money, and it was discovered that she had contracted German measles. The father was not in the picture. According to everyone she talked to (both pro and anti), it was pretty much a given that a baby would have major complications, not only at birth, but throughout life. She had three days of intense counseling and heard all options available. Adoption probably was the weakest of the options because of health concerns. She opted for abortion. She doesn't regret it. I think most do, but in her situation, she felt it best, not only for her, but for a baby she would bring into the world.
I'm not an abortion proponent. I totally disagree with abortion when used as birth control. But each of us has to make a decision that we will live with for the rest of our lives. It doesn't go away. It must be between each individual, their doctor, and their God.
Three of my grandchildren don't have their fathers in their lives. None of my daughters ever considered abortion.
I applaud you for considering adoption. I applaud you for your belief on abortion, because you are helping in some way.
Loading....