mousecrazy

I believe there are two spellings of the name: Osama and Usama. I have seen the name abbreviated "UBL", but never "OBL". I believe I was clear that what was SLIGHTLY IMPORTANT was the fact that the readers of post #370 were lead to believe that President Bush met with Osama/Usama bin Laden when that did not happen. I was being sarcastic. It would be VERY IMPORTANT. Why is it "bad" for the Bush family to have a relationship with any Saudi family, including the bin Ladens? I have been told that MORE communication with the folks in the Middle East is necessary, not less. If the Americans refuse to talk to M.E. leaders, they are bad; if they talk to M.E. leaders, they are bad. This does not make sense to those who think along the same lines as I do. The current president is not the only president to have had conversations and relationships with individuals from M.E. countries (Clinton/Arafat). I have stated my feelings ad nauseum (to many, I am sure), so not sure what you mean, BJean, by that...but I am still challenging the statement that "Bush met with bin Laden". What does that mean? Which is bin Laden? I completely agree with you about most of your last paragraph, except this one thing: if someone puts up information that is just blatantly false, like this ~ American forgets that Bill Clinton entertained the Ku Klux Klan in the White House ~ then someone else has the obligation to point that out. At the very least, it should be expected that the claim be supported with something, don't you think? I do not see that as being intolerant. Is that your definition of intolerant? What I see here is a climate of "tolerance" meaning conservatives and supporters of America must accept liberals and American fault-finders, while the reverse is rarely ever true. And while I realize that I am beating my head against the proverbial brick wall, and bucking the commonly accepted definition of diversity (everything EXCEPT American/Christian), I choose to visit here and try to engage in some kind of dialogue. Some people even find me reasonably intelligent.

Sherry, you look beautiful, girl! My parents had a Golden...his name was Kody. He was a retirement present to my dad, when he retired from Eastman Kodak. He was the best dog! I wish my dad would get another dog, but he won't right now. I keep asking, though! Like Betty said, I didn't even notice that the tree wasn't decorated...I was just looking at the 3 of you!

Cassandra, CONGRATULATIONS! How fun, we'll be planning a wedding...do let us in on the details! Mary, seriously, get those zinc lozenges at Walmart. They'll really make a difference! Betty, you give such sweet advice...and Eileen, too...I'm thinking of you, Dianne. There are a lot of things that could be going on, but since you mentioned menopause, that might be your gut telling you that's what it is, so go check into it. I have some sadness this time of year due to missing Mom...but I kinda of just embrace it and let it happen, then it slides on by. My best description would be that it comes like waves...sometimes the tide is totally out, and I don't have too many feelings of sadness; sometimes the seas are rougher, and the waves are higher and faster. I decided it was better to feel them, because if not, they just sneak up on me and get me later. Whatever is going on, thanks for letting us know, and I hope we can put our arms around you and give you a safe place. Mandy, good luck at Wally World...I was there yesterday. It wasn't too bad, if you wear your smile and your patient hat! Hey, did ya'll check that link to the little movie about the train?

This is in post #370: "Americans forget that the Bushs used to entertain Bin Laden at their ranch." I guess I could be picky on this, but I took it to mean THE Usama bin Laden...for who careS what other bin Ladens were entertained? The implication here is that there is some connection between President Bush, or the Bush family, and UBL...AND that Americans are stupid enough to forget such a thing. Neither are true. I happen to think that is slightly important. When untruths like this are passed up, unchallenged, even by those of the same philosophical mind, it is wrong. I know some of you on the left side of the fence knew this was untrue, but let it slide. Intellectual dishonesty will not assist us in reaching any conclusion, except an incorrect one.

It is easier to point the finger of blame than worry about what our OWN cell phones, air conditioning, gasoline, alcohol, cigarette, food, paper product, etc., comsumption is costing the earth... That makes me wonder...what kind of "burden" do cell phones put on the earth's resources...all that infrastructure...plastic...probably taking advantage of some underdeveloped country's labor supply, too....???

Hi, and welcome! Just in case you don't know, it is sooo important to stay with your liquids, and then mushies. It is not about "cheating" now...it is about HEALING. You want that band to heal up nice and smooth and healthy...the better you do now, the better you will do in the long run. Oh, did I mention? It IS a long run! So, relax. This is a long journey, and you are going to SUCCEED!!!!!!! It is the best feeling ever! Good luck...post and let us know if you have any questions!

I am not sure what is causing your plateau, unless it is just time for your body to adjust...you started at a relatively low weight, and have lost a good percentage of the total weight you wanted to lose. What you eat looks very reasonable to me, and I certainly understand your caution at getting another fill. I think you may just need to increase your activity. On complacency: nothing wrong with that. Some time spent getting used to the new you, is time well spent, I think. When you are ready, you will do what you need to do get the pounds moving down again. I go for the less stress the better...there's not a race going on here. Good luck with the next step of the journey!

Please provide credible evidence that Usama bin Laden has been entertained at the Crawford, Texas ranch by the Bush family. I would like to know when this occurred, and where it is documented. I was under the impression that UBL was ousted or disowned by his family long ago. I don't think that Americans "forget" this...I think it never happened.

I was gonna suggest Ebay for the Givenchy...I also have another suggestion for a scent to try: Philosophy Amazing Grace. It's soft and light. Almost all perfume counters have samples, Sherry...just tell them your situation, and ask for one. Then, you can try it, and find out before you sink some cash into a bottle of perfume. DON'T FEEL GUILTY!!! All us girlie folk need some girlie stuff! Drop some major hints to your DH if you just can't buy it for yourself! I think most dept. stores carry Philosophy...try it out. Another thing Mandy is right about...get those Zinc lozenges. They work WONDERS!!!! I use the generet Walmart kind, but have used other kinds, and just a couple of days of using them at night and I'll be immensely better! I've been running those shopping errands, decorating the tree, getting my Secret Santa gifts ready for next week...what else? Ordering the Christmas pictures for our cards, and oh, the laundry! Sounds like everyone else is doing basically the same thing! See ya tomorrow!

Hey, it's today: "Nine Ladies Dancing," which includes today! Starting Monday, it's 8. My little paper chain is getting shorter and shorter...I even had a few tears today. Not to worry, it's just a passing thing...memories and all that. Hugs to all! Cindy

Happy birthday, Dianne!!!!!! All the joys and sorrows we have gone through together, and all the new and old friends we greet and then wave goodbye to, remind me of this little movie. I received the link to it from a dear friend I once taught with, who is now retired himself. I thought it might be something you would all enjoy...with a hankie! http://www.inspiringthots.net/movie/life-on-train.php Thanks for being on my train!

Awwww, Eileen. I am so sorry for your friend. I know today will be a very difficult day for all of you. Go and be the great friend to her that we all know you are.

:clap2: :clap2: :clap2: Congratulations, Patty!!!!!:clap2: :clap2: :clap2: Okay, did I yell that loud enough? I will keep my fingers crossed for the last couple of hoops, but...it sounds like it's a done deal. You'll get excited again, soon enough! HUGS!!!!! Yes, it is "Ten Lords a Leaping" today! I made it through the big Holiday Luncheon, and it turned out great! I had a great team...wait, do I sound like I just won the Super Bowl or something? LOL! Anyway, that big hurdle has been hurdled! Love ya'll, Cindy

The person who started the thread and chose its content, Sunta, has insulted and offended real people. There is no guarantee not to be offended, and Sunta may certainly insult anyone she wants. Civil discourse would demand that after expressing an opinion such as hers, and after finding that it hurt some worthy opponents and friendly cohorts, she might apologize, or rethink the position...reframe or refine the position so that she retains her stalwart defense of the environment, but includes some respect for those who choose to have more than 1 or 2 children. Several posters, including myself, presented some satirical solutions to the environmental concerns, such as stopping the research on curing diseases, using horses and buggies, or disposing of pets....and since these went unanswered, and the focus remained on the number of children, and words "dumb" and "idiotic" were used repeatedly, one can only assume that Sunta is not of the mind to care one bit about other's feelings, and furthermore has a suspiciously strong dislike for large families, probably for reasons other than the environment. I say let's give it a rest, and let Sunta have her strong feelings of dislike for everyone who is not like she thinks they ought to be. There seems to be no possibility of reason here. You can hurt people's feelings and disrespect them, but they do have the right to tell you that you did. You don't get to play the victim then, and say "You called me names." That's not right because you started the thread. You are ineligible for victim status. Oh, being a Christian does not in anyway mean I am just like Christ...it means I have been saved by Christ. We are not perfect; we are sinners. That might be the most difficult acknowledgement of all.

Yes, that is the thing with "theories" like this one. It conveniently ignores the reality of actual people. Thanks for weighing in, Diane. I hope it helps to put a face on the reality of who is being insulted, and how much words can hurt.

I think you would have to define the term "lose". The military won the battles, but we have failed to control the peace. We promised the Iraqi govt. that we would support their democracy, and we should stand behind that promise. Sure, it is costly and the way is difficult. Some things are. Thank God there are men and women who are up to the job. I'm glad your money is on the new Sec. of Defense. I think he might surprise you.

Good afternoon! So it's "Eleven Lords a Leapin'" for me today! I just got back from doing the shopping for Holiday Luncheon, which is tomorrow...it's the big shindig of the year...look at me! I'm the coordinator! And, I should be down there decorating right now! Cass, eating too fast will choke you or make you PB every time, so start paying attention! I STILL do it, and I'm almost a year and half out from surgery. It's a hard habit to break. Good luck with the next hungry moment! Hugs! Gotta run...more later....hugs to everyone! Cindy

So all the mass graves in Iraq (over ONE MILLION Iraqiis are believed to have gone missing from 1983 to 1999-executed and buried in these mass gravesites), and the rape/torture rooms, the (under-reported) discoveries of chemical and biological agents/weapons, the terrorist training camps....just "nevermind" and "oh, so sorry". I never expected the public's idea of WMD to be found. The very fact that UN resolutions were ignored, that US planes were being shot at daily, that $$ was being used to finance groups and terrorists to bring down America and American interests...any one or all of the above is enough to justify US involvment. When leaders specifically state that their goal is the destruction of the United States, wouldn't it be arrogant at best, and foolish at least, to ignore the threat? Why wouldn't you believe it? The President of Iran says it practically every day. Look at the big picture. Who cares why or how we are in Iraq, at this point. We cannot "lose" there. The cost is our lives and safety. Losing will embolden the others, and if you are of the belief Iraq was impotent, they are not. Showing a confused, weak, simpering and frightened face to the world will not show them how enlightened and educated we are. It will show them how correct they were when they assessed that we were "paper tigers." I think that we are. I think it is very sad. We are so caught up in political correctness that we can't stand for anything. I hope, I pray, that our American strength and unity does not fail us, when it really counts.

I am not embarrassed or sickened. I AM concerned that there are people who think that the evil in the world is the Republican party, or in America...at least the Republican party and President rightfully identify the evil in the world as being outside the U.S....not the Democrats. Believing that Americans are the evil in the world is putting us in a very vulnerable position...perhaps more than vulnerable. Some may call this fear-mongering; I think it is a realistic appraisal of the world situation. Terrorism by Islamic fundamentalists has been carried out long before President Bush took office. How does this fact fit into the world view of the "Bush Bad" and America-is-the-cause-of-the-evil-in-the-world point of view? I seriously don't understand this. How does this point of view explain how to deal with threats of Iran? Syria? Should the U.S. become isolationist? Give up our support of Israel? How will that help us? If we should not be isolationists, with whom should we be allies, and what would that look like? Should we be a nation that supports freedom, and comes to the aid of others seeking freedom? All the time? Sometimes? Never? As Americans, we certainly treasure our rights of freedom of speech and dissent, but we also agreed to a certain type of social contract, where we understood that some of our individual freedoms would be set aside for general advantage of society. People say we have given up our freedoms for this war on terror, but I have a hard time understanding what freedoms have been lost. I suppose I feel I have not lost any personal freedom in my day to day life. I still work, use my car, phone, bank, etc., just like always. What have I lost? On the other hand, what do I stand to lose? I think I am losing an American society that is proud of itself. Good, bad, ugly, or indifferent...Americans once were able to say, "We are the good guys." Now, too many people look at despots and dictators, and think they are the good guys, and disrespect their own elected leaders. Are all the leaders good guys? No. Are they better than dictators, who grab people off the street and rape and kill or starve their population? I think it's safe to say yes to that. In two years, about half of the American public will bother to go to the polls and vote for a new president. Yet, the problems in the world will persist...the threats of Iran, Syria, and all other terror loving and terror-supporting nations will continue their activities, and the problems that Carter, Bush, Clinton, and G. Bush have faced will be blamed on someone else. What is the point on blaming the American president? Let's figure out how to address the real problem. This post is longer than I intended; I don't know that anyone involved in this thread cares to understand the point anyway. Sorry I have no Bush-bashing content. I am interested in the issues beyond who is actually the sitting President.

Not that Kathy needs assistance, yet I share her feeling thst Sunta seems to be somewhat in denial about her tone. Sure, we all agree that she may post just about whatever she wants, and may have whatever opinion her heart desires. I'm sure Kathy is not worried about a bloodied opinion or post, nor am I. The point is this: that it appears that Sunta does not recognize that her choice of language reflects an attitude of disdain, rather than a position of disagreement. Can anyone see the distinction here? I believe there is a definite and important difference. It is different to say, "I believe it is socially irresponsible to have 18 children" and explain the reasons, than to say, "It is idiotic and dumb to have so many damn children," slamming Christians along the way. First of all, if your goal is to communicate with people, and perhaps even persuade them, you will not have them listening past your insult (perceived or real). Secondly, when called out on the disrespectful part, it would be preferable to acknowledge that you do not respect Christians, rather than become defensive. It would be easier to accept. No one's calling for censorship, unless good manners and basic courtesy are now being considered censorship.

I just want to encourage you to relax and know that your body really needs a break from all the weight loss from time to time. Your body needs to adjust; a plateau is a necessary period. Another important factor is to get involved with your band, and be a partner with your band. This is definitely a team effort! The band will not work by itself. You will need to make sure you are doing at least half the work, and your trusty band will meet you halfway. Mommy3boys is exactly right...but I bet that by losing 20 lbs in a year, even though she was hoping for more, she did better than she would have without the band at all...and she also proved to herself that she could not only maintain her previous loss, but continue to lose! What a victory! Hang in there and be patient. You are doing better than you think you are!

LOL! Green, you are right...we are not often on the same side of the fence, so it's interesting to find ourselves there on one issue anyway! I think in most things I write, I urge people to look at the big picture. Picking apart an issue is not the way to go, in my book. I do like the idea of self-reflection, and seeing if we can learn to live a simpler life...it has been a concept I find myself drawn to more and more. Instead of more clothes, less can be freeing...instead of more make-up, less. I still give into my consumerism tendencies, but I'm trying to simplify. Controlling population growth is a very small matter in the big picture, it seems to me, and I wonder why it is so upsetting to some.

I wonder why the focus is on the statistically small number of couples who choose to have larger numbers of children, than on microwave dinners, air conditioning, fast food, mega malls, etc.? Shall I hazard a guess? It is convenient to focus on the one aspect we are not attached to. If we want to truly delve into how to sustain a lifestyle people want, that's one thing. If you want to convince people to change a lifestyle they like, that's another. If you want them to abandon a lifestyle they love, and adopt a more austere lifestyle, they are going to have to have a cause they can get behind, and theoretical reasons like "we might run out of coal 2,000 years from now" is not going to get it. Being told to live a more austere lifestyle by those who have more $$ than sense,is ridiculous. I'm thinking of politicians who pass environmental protection laws that somehow never affect their private planes and limos or yachts. Or, even more ridiculous, the spokespeople of modern American culture, the celebrities, who become "activitists" for environmental causes, but continue their excessive lifestyles. I don't mind them having those things...just let me have affordable power and a vehicle I enjoy driving. Have as many children as you want. I don't think it's going to affect the big picture unless suddenly a majority of couples decide that 4 or more children is the way to go.

Anne, I love real strings of popcorn and cranberries! I haven't done that in years, but I would like to! We made little ornaments for our trees outside, with peanut butter and birdseed and dried fruit, for the birdies! Uhm, not this year....but it's fun! Countdown update...counting today, 12 days! I'm starting to get "short-timer's attitude." I actually don't care about some of the things that are being discussed. I think I'm switching gears to "home-centered." I love it!

Would it be like throwing oil on a fire to question the accuracy of the claims of dwindling natural resources? I am not an expert in this field, but I have flown over many parts of the US that appear to be totally un-populated. I stand on the side of thinking of children as gifts from God, not burdens. I believe most people give more to society than they take. I am not comfortable with the idea that I should tell others how many children they should have (China?), but I sometimes find myself wanting to tell people they, in particular, shouldn't have children. I know that's wrong, but I'm being honest about that. When I was younger, I did not believe I would ever want to have children, and I said things about having children much like those who do not want children are saying here. I changed my mind. It is possible to change one's point of view, even when you are really old, like me, at 51. I, too, once believed that I was so much more educated and aware of the world than the "others" and it was easy to be condescending and look down my nose at "them." I understand the inter-connection and overlap between pagan rituals and history and parts of Christianity, and it doesn't screw with my head. What Christianity has that makes the difference is the redemptive power of Jesus Christ, and the message of forgiveness inherent in its doctrine. This is more powerful, to me, than the length of the days in summer and winter. Whether you want no children or a dozen, matters not. I doubt our grandparents had to wait in ERs because there simply weren't very many. The answer to that problem has many other causes, besides a growth in population. Perhaps we could just force people to move out of the urban centers? There is plenty of open land available in the world. We could quit developing cures for diseases,and that would cut down on population growth. Or, we could stop improving food production and more people could starve, which again would reduce population growth. I think a fascination with the, in my opinion, non-problem of over-population, is a symptom of something else. It is interesting that the "problem" of a few couples having many children is so upsetting, but the "problem" of many couples choosing not to have any, and choosing not to adopt the ones without parents, and choosing to abort the babies conceived who are unwanted, is not upsetting at all. Very interesting.