Coffee Spill, Shattered Will. Happy ALL HALLOWS Eve?

This door mat does two things. It's at the kitchen sink keeping my feet dry when power washing through my dishes, and it hides the spilled hookah pipe burns that somebody trailed across the floor.  I like it.

But it's a mess to clean under every Monday, so I usually avoid looking too closely until something really ugly finds its way down there, or guests are expected.

My mantra over big spills is, 'must be God's opinion that I should finally mop in here!' But the other day, that old furious cursing which began mysteriously at recess one day in the 4th grade, popped out from hiding, and beat my mantra to a pulp before I think to wax philosophical and resign myself to another calamity clean-up.

It was a quiet blurt, kept under my breath for the better part of 40 years, hidden from good Baptists and children. . .  G-- D---It rang out as I tried to balance a newspaper, purse and mail pile while holding a full mug. Tepid coffee splattered down my pant leg and foot, then spread along under my hearty sink mat.

D1 and DH didn't even wince, so I swabbed away, pretending I didn't care that they just heard what I just heard.

But privately, all I could think of was Alice.

Two days prior, she reminded our Bible Club kids what a sinful, horrid thing it is to use The LORD's name this way, and that people who do are so utterly lost. {"...for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses His name." Ex 20:7}

WAIT!  THAT'S me she's talking about. I ... really... need... to...

I really need to do a cussing study, and quick. Either we teach the kids that legalism is not our friend, or I have to quit going to Bible Club.

I mean, after 40 years, why would this hidden little curse of mine suddenly resurface?

Alison G. told me to find a Deliverance Service.  Something about demonic oppression.  WELL. I don't doubt that!

But at least I have a spotless sink mat and my hookah burns don't show.

While I don't dispute there's something evil lurking just under the surface of my soul, I'm not sure we don't all suffer from it equally. It's called original sin. It's just that my will to do battle against it has flagged lately... been fighting with Hubby for (counts fingers...) @ 19 days. . .

Scratching my head. I recall the same thing happened last Halloween Week. And that one week when I had planned a neighborhood Bible Club for the squirrley boys? My mouth went haywire then, too. (My DEAR. Your mouth is always haywire. Really.)

Let's do an experiment: let's move to a nice street where the house next door doesn't have a yard-full of death-on-display for three full weeks, and see if I don't have a clean mouth by Halloween.

I LOVE SCIENCE. When can I start packing?

[And I love my dear neighbors; but wonder how I switched from boycotting Halloween to becoming a Boo-Booster without FIRST besting my demons.]

(AND P.S. - u were drinking tea, not that demon coffee)

Iron Out My Congresswoman

The sum of Congresswoman Laura Richardson's response to a proLife appeal is sadly lacking in sanity, truth and substance.

[Hums tune to TheGrinch...]  "Her heart is a greasy black peel..."

KUDOS to Joe Pitts.

Thank you for contacting me about the Protect Life Act.  I appreciate the opportunity to hear your thoughts on this issue. As you may be aware, Congressman Joseph Pitts introduced H.R. 358, the Protect Life Act on January 20, 2011.  The Protect Life Act imposes an unprecedented limitation on abortion coverage and takes extreme measures to prevent women from accessing safe and legal abortion services. This legislation will prevent women from purchasing private insurance coverage for abortion [OH really!?] while exempting hospitals from treating women in need of emergency abortion care.  The Affordable Care Act already contains strict safeguards [strict?!] at multiple levels to prevent federal funds from being used to pay for abortion services beyond those in cases of rape, incest or where the life of woman would be in grave and eminent danger. But the Protect Life Act wants to go further.  The Protect Life Act will make it virtually impossible for insurance companies in state health-insurance exchanges to offer abortion coverage, including those paying for coverage entirely with private dollars. The bill also prohibits all individuals who receive federal subsidies from purchasing a plan that includes abortion coverage, as well as barring insurance plans from covering abortion if they include even one individual who receives a subsidy.  [Why is it wrong to tell a woman to pay for her own death deed? The taxpayer is supposed to underwrite her child's demise?] Today, nearly 87% of private employer-sponsored insurance offer plans which include abortion coverage. This bill would deter insurance companies from offering plans with such options and would likely force millions of women to drop the coverage they currently have. [How's that?] Currently, all hospitals in America that receive Medicare or Medicaid funding are bound by a 1986 law known as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), to provide emergency care to all patients, regardless of the circumstance. Under EMTALA, if a woman required an emergency abortion to save her life and she was a patient at an anti-abortion hospital or being treated by a health care provider against abortion on religious or moral grounds, the hospital would be forced to either perform the abortion or transfer the patient.  [Transfer away! We've allowed the draconian Feds to tell Catholic hospitals they have no right to obey their conscience!?] The Affordable Care Act leaves laws that protect medical providers [not according to the above paragraph!] who have religious or moral objections to abortion services intact. But the Protect Life Act goes even further by not requiring medical providers who are not willing to terminate a pregnancy to either perform the abortion or facilitate a transfer. This bill would override the requirement that emergency room doctors provide emergency care to patients and would essentially allow a hospital to let a pregnant woman die rather than perform a life-saving procedure [Doc's don't consider an ectopic pregnancy treatment to be an elective abortion, my dear]. The Protect Life Act prohibits the Affordable Care Act from ensuring access to abortion [child killing] services. This broad language could prevent states and state-based health insurance exchanges from ensuring that women get information about the health care coverage options available to them. It should be an ethical healthcare provision that patients be presented with accurate and complete information about their medical options in order to make the best decisions regarding their health care [Here!Here! That would include requisite ultrasounds showing the woman how alive her child is, yes?!]. This bill denies women that fundamental right [to an ultrasound!?]. In addition, a subtle provision of the Protect Life Act could allow insurers to refuse to offer important services that are part of the minimum standards for health coverage such as services and supplies related to contraception, infertility and sexually transmitted diseases. [OnceUponAtime in the UNITED STATES of America, private companies weren't forced by the government to compromise their principles.] This extreme anti-choice bill is about protecting [did you mean 'removing' ?] the reproductive rights of Americans in our country. A woman's right to choose [choose to do what? OH. Right. "Choose" to kill her unborn child...] what is best for themselves and their families is a constitutionally protected right [Not for long, my friend The Supers who voted for Roe/Carhart/Doe/Casey are soon to be pitied, prayed for and pilloried.]. Eliminating access to legal abortions denies women the right to make their own health decisions in accordance with their religious and moral beliefs and as a result, infringes on their equal rights. When it comes to attacking women's freedom and privacy, this legislation knows no bounds. It is an extreme attack against women's reproductive right and undermines women's access to quality healthcare.  [again, what part of the Constitution instructs us to pay for the mistakes of lied-to women? And what part of High School English did you sleep through, rendering the above paragraph permissible?] On October 13, 2011, the Protect Life Act passed the House by a vote of 251-172. I voted against H.R. 358 because this bill is not only unconstitutional, but it is dangerous. H.R. 358 now awaits consideration in the Senate. It is a fundamental right [RESPONSIBILITY] of every woman to manage her own fertility [You can say that again! WHY are all these children sleeping around?] and we must continue to condemn bills [and Supreme Court Edicts] that threaten that right [ROE was such an EDICT]. In a time of such tough economic instability, we should be concentrated on creating jobs and stabilizing the economy, not advancing extreme legislation that is nothing less than the most comprehensive and radical assault of women's health [freedom to live irresponsibly] in our lifetime.  Again, thank you for taking the time to contact me about this issue.  As your Congresswoman, I hope that you will continue to inform me of your opinions so that I can best represent you in the future.  Sincerely, Laura A. Richardson Member of Congress

Why Then, Vote At All?

When vetting presidential candidates and exploring their positions on issues of import, I am always shocked at how far from the mark my "gut" assessment is.

The New American magazine had outed Mr. Perry on four huge "redflags," and my heart sank. I thought those rugged good looks were a can't-lose-qualification for highest office.

Today's little Bible Club lesson for 30 K-5th graders said it all: 1Samuel 16:7.

With that, here's what Doug Phillips' ReportCard on the Candidates reveals  (OH, why can't Ron Paul find a handler who will teach him to stop gawking?)

http://adv.visionforum.com/email/2011/10/17_reportcard/reportcardIII.pdf

If I can't vote for the best looking, most dashing, rugged looking candidate, well, I'm just taking my marbles and going home.

Meanwhile, Paul's Texas Straight Talk phone-line is a weekly MUST: 888.322.1414

("If we pose Ron Paul next to this cactus, maybe he'll look presidential")

Fight

If the doctor is perceived as your ally and friend,
a provider of quality service,
do you then allow him the right to
inject his patients without their prior consent?

If the provider of police protection,
military protection and inter-state commerce
objects to private commerce, do you acquiesce to such a
provider's demands
to purchase all your food at one store?

Or borrow money at only one bank?

REcall (Solzhenitzyn's commrades were shot for growing thier own food and reading the Bible).
REcall (Europeans were put out of business for refusing to adopt the Euro).

If the monopoly utility company installs a new device
on your property that spies on you
for their stated purposes
even as it delivers promised and paid for electrons on demand,
do you look the other way?

No, no. And
NO.

BeingBusyGreatnessDies

First to drop off Jon in rain
Then drizzled stop in parking lot
for haircut from
JO-anne,

(Not in.
Supercuts wins.)

Then to find a carry all for
Wedding gifts
we bought;

Now a mirror for Jon's truck
Ordered for a drive
up north

To Woodland wedding.

Next,  provender of
massive
toffee makings

(Woodland is a potluck).

Lastly, MasterTech:
Will Jon's truck
ford
The grapevine...?



All the while a great man gasped.
All the while a hero lapsed.
All the while the figurehead

Of a generation

passed.

Steve Jobs died.

I cried.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Mr. Kawasaki, please
Tell me that he bent the knee.
That he

Like we,
The profit seized,
Won

by He Whose death
Time greived,
And pow'r
retrieved,

Buddism alieved.