BethFromVA

I am, in DC.

Okay, WTF?? We go from having fat-filled blobs to fruit roll-ups, and y'all go from moobs to PECS?? Another reason men suck. :cool2:

I believe you. :cool2:

You look like you hae zero body fat. :cool2:

I dunno, Heather, it's a tough one. I absolutely agree that they are necessary to help innocent children, but I have also seen innocent people get caught up in the ringer and suffer due to some baseless speculation.

I rarely do eggs -- and have heard others can't eat them if they are filled properly -- but I'm on mushies until Monday. It's a good source of protein, and scrambled are soft (though still "with" me, if you know what I mean! lol). After Monday I probably won't eat them again for some time. I think for lunch it'll be mashed potatoes or a crab cake.

PJTP: Omg, is this what restriction feels like?? I had my fourth fill on Thursday, and I just ate two scrambled eggs and I swear I feel full. :drool:

You're singing my song. ColoradoChick and I were talking about that very thing over dinner the other night. She got into size 12's (a huge shout-out to you, my dear!!), and she still sees what she once was! I told her that the eyes trick us... to find old pictures of herself and compare them to now. I don't know what it is about our minds and eyes playing tricks on us like that. When I was my hugest, I would look in the mirror and say, "Well, not great, but not horrible." WHAT?? Then I'd see a photo of myself and say, "Who the f*ck is THAT???" Now I'm down nearly 50 pounds and look in the mirror and go UGH. It's even worse when I see pictures. Will I ever see a decent person? I can only hope.

I am with you a thousand percent on this one. What I don't like is how these programs seem to tell people that they can't do it themselves without the help of Uncle Sam. I have more faith in people than that. It's not like that. I believe that if people HAD to take care of themselves, rather than relying on that monthly check, they WOULD. How did we do it before the advent of welfare? Families and churches took care of their families. I don't believe people were outright dying in the streets from lack of -- at least, not any more than they do now. If we would get a check on our illegal problem, THOSE jobs could be filled by those on welfare now. I am all for helping those who, for a short time, may need a hand up. What I can't stand is how we reward baby makers and those with no intention of EVER working with my hard-earned money. If I knew it was only being used for the elderly with no means of support or those who have fallen on hard times through no fault of their own, I could deal better with it.

She's very wise. I'm sure we have all gone through that -- keeping the "diet" mentality, and we've all failed diets.

Oh, man, now THAT is a Texas feast!!! *drooooool* :drool:

Slim, I REALLY love the tag line you borrowed from another poster. It's an excellent motivator and something to remember.

You kiddin'?? I'm making a grocery list as we speak! Oh, and I can bring crab cakes if you wish. That is also a do-able mushie. And being Sunday anyway, the fourth day after my fill... :thumbup:

My own input... I think it makes a HUGE difference. When we feel good, we are more readily able to choose good things. When we feel bad, we tend to choose things that are bad for us, whether it's something we shouldn't eat or simply choosing not to exercise. I know that when I have been really down in the dumps, I have NOT wanted to exercise. I have to almost physically force myself to do so, reminding myself of how good I feel (physically and mentally) once I do it. I think it has to do with endorphins and all that other stuff we hear about. :thumbup:

I love reading your posts, Irene. :thumbup: You're da bomb!

Then it's never gonna happen. All we can hope NOW is that they don't turn into double-longs. :thumbup:

Omg, Lulu, I thought you said must go get DRUNK. That's my speed reeding for me again... :thumbup:

These are the things that stood out most to me. I too would be considered against paying taxes since I do not believe it is government's -- or citizens' -- role to redistribute wealth. Since we began doing that, we have "created" more poor people than ever in history. In most casses, people WON'T die if expected to take care of themselves like they used to way back when. It's like your child holding her breath or refusing to eat. Eventually they will realize that only goes so far -- that breath must be taken, and hunger sucks. People living on the public dole for years or generations has not made this a better or stronger country. People having their hard-earned money wrested away from them to give to people, many of whom are simply lowlifes and no goods, does not make this a better or stronger country. We not only have greed in our corporations, we have greed in that 32 percent who pay no taxes as well. As for the homeschooling, God love 'em for doing it! I have almost never heard of a homeschooler falling below the very low line that public school kids consistently fall. For the life of me, I don't know how homeschoolers make things worse -- unless it's like you say, that the best and brightest are kept out of the schools! The percentage of homeschoolers is relatively small. I am constantly and consistently for vouchers. It's too late for MY child, but I am still for it for others' kids. When ANY company is made to compete, everybody wins. Yet schools are just another example of government waste and ruin.

Believe it or not, BJean, I was not trying to be offensive in what I asked. Because I am honestly trying to debate and not get personal with you on these things, I apologize for having said something that apparently hit on a more personal level.

On war(s), BJean, I found this today: How Obama voted on war funding bills in Congress Major war-funding legislation while Barack Obama was in the Senate, and how he voted: _May 2005: Congress approved an $82 billion bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and international anti-terrorism efforts. Obama voted yes. _June 2006: Congress cleared a $94.5 billion bill to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as provide aid to hurricane victims. Obama voted yes. _September 2006: Congress cleared a $448 billion Pentagon funding bill that included $70 billion for U.S. military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama voted yes. _April 2007: Congress cleared a $124 billion spending bill that provided $90 billion for war costs but mandated the withdrawal of U.S. troops within six months. Obama voted yes, but President George W. Bush vetoed the legislation. _May 2007: Congress approved a roughly $100 billion spending measure to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and domestic projects, including hurricane relief. Obama voted no. _December 2007: Congress cleared a $555 billion catchall spending bill that included $70 billion for U.S. military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Obama did not vote. _June 2008: Congress approved a measure to spend $162 billion for war costs as well as provide a 13-week extension of unemployment benefits and emergency relief for the flood-ravaged Midwest. Obama voted yes. How Obama voted on war funding bills in Congress

PJTP: NSV: C-cup! 'Nuff said!!

I love it here. I don't miss Houston at all. The closest thing we had to mountains there were overpasses.

Well, at the risk of creating a long post, I will try to address these issues as you raise them. I don't think that's entirely fair. More babies are born to children who have everything there for their using and probably have never heard the word "abstinance" ever. To call her on the carpet for what her 17-year-old daughter did is pretty low, in my opinion. Okay, so she's rigid on abortion. As for stem cells, it's been proven numerous times that there are more and better stem cells in umbical cord blood than in an aborted fetus. Okay, but does that make one a winger? I don't know that she believes people shouldn't pay taxes (did she say that anywhere that can be linked?), but I DO have a problem paying taxes to a government that squanders it so badly. Not only are we paying out TRILLIONS to reward bad behavior, there were also BILLIONS in bullcrap earmarks and perks. I can't even say how long it's been since we have had a fiscally responsible government, but I doubt it's been in MY lifetime. So while the rest of us do without, the government continues to party like it's 1999. But those are her children, and that choice is her right. The handful of homeschooled children is not the cause of the crappy school system we have, GOVERNMENT is. Waste is. Teachers' unions are. People with agendas (regardless of which side) are. Johnny can't read or write, but he can put a condom on a banana and can tell you what's in our landfill. Plus, it's been statistically proven that homeschooled children run circles around public school kids. But that makes her a winger? I know a TON of liberals who also kill animals. But I could say that about every single upper level liberal senator and congressperson still alive, and some that no longer are. But congress voted to give the president the power to go to war, and they were hugely liberal. True, I have. But let me ask you, if she is a winger because she believes in "X," are you not also a winger for being completely on the opposite side as her? Just food for thought...

Good, something we can all do in unison!

Hehe, fair enough. Hey, I think we've been doing pretty well today. I'm sure we won't solve any of the world's ills, but still... Okay, then my question to you is, what makes her right-wing in your book? I guess when I hear that term, I'm not exactly sure what it means to different people because of differing views of what makes on a "wing."