Hanging By a Thread

The Power of Impact

To start with, I've had a bad cold. I got it from my boys over the weekend while traveling. Of course, it means nothing when mom gets a cold. Life goes on. So, I have been tired and cranky and generally feeling cruddy all week. Thursday was no exception, but then my mood got worse. And on Friday, I woke with a tremendously heavy sadness on my heart and mind. Here's why.

On, Thursday, the boys and I spent the day with my computer or phone on a live feed of the Senate Judiciary Committee, watching both Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and Judge Brett Kavanaugh testify before the nation.

I knew only her story and very little else about Dr. Ford before her testimony. I thought I believed her story, but was anxious to hear her and see her tell her side of things to determine her credibility in my own mind…not that my opinion of her matters in the least.

I was struck by her calm, yet genuine and terrified-beneath-the-surface demeanor. I understood how she felt sitting there sharing her most devastating details of shame and guilt and confusion and sadness and aloneness that she has been carrying with her for 36 years. My heart went out to her.

We listened to her words and watched her face and heard her tone and completely believed her. She gains nothing and has lost much in coming forward to speak. My heart broke for her.

Listening to her speak about her 15 year old self and this bewildering, traumatizing experience took me back to my teenage years. I recalled two distinct times that I allowed myself to get into a vulnerable position, during high school, about 28 years ago. Now, I say that I allowed myself to get into a vulnerable situation because time and time again we see that it is the woman's responsibility to steer clear of such situations and it's her fault if she does not.

Now, in my case, nothing happened to me in either of these instances, but I am now and was then well aware that it could have. Just knowing I was in a situation that made me feel trapped and vulnerable, I can clearly recall all kinds of details about the space I was in, the smells, the sounds, some (but not all) of the people there or nearby, how I felt and what I was thinking, but I could not give you a date and I could not name each person there. I'm not even sure of the exact year. This does not mean it didn't happen.

I imagine that if you asked the other people who were there with me during those two instances they would not recall these things in such detail. In fact, I would bet they would not have any recollection of these instances at all. This does not mean it didn't happen.

I NEVER told anyone about these instances…not my best friend, not my mother, not my husband. No one. This is the first time I have ever shared anything about these two instances outside of my own mind. I did not tell anyone because I felt shame for allowing myself to get into such situations. This does not mean it didn't happen.

The reason it stands out in my memory so vividly and has stayed with me all of these years is that it had a significant impact on me. After the second instance, I promised myself then, in high school, I would not allow myself to get into such a vulnerable situation again. These two instances scared me and cautioned me and trained me and shaped me.

I can imagine that the other people involved in these two instances didn't recall it happening a year after it occurred, let alone 5 or 10 or 22 years later. This is simply because it did not have an impact on them. It did not scare them or worry them or warrant a change in how they approached certain people or situations.

Now, going back to Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, one of them is not telling the truth, or at least not remembering what happened correctly. One of them was not impacted by this experience. My money is on Judge Kavanaugh as being the one who is not telling the whole truth and/or not remembering the instance correctly and thoroughly.

Judge Kavanaugh's demeanor and attitude also made me think of instances, both in working in the courts and general life experiences, of privileged men who are used to getting what they want when they want it, and then get caught being bad and are at risk of not getting what they want.

He yelled and deflected blame and repeated the same answers over and over and made accusations. He was evasive and sometimes responded with silence. He talked back and whined and cried. He was all kinds of emotional and belligerent and haughty. I have seen this behavior. I know this kind of behavior. I have seen this behavior from grown men, but any parent will recognize this kind of adolescent, rebellious, defensive fit throwing, as well.

This spoiled, whining, privileged man child having a huge meltdown temper tantrum was watched by thousands and thousands of people, and I believe it will have an impact.

The impact will not be on the male Republican Senators who rebuked the Democrats for causing such pain and suffering for this upstanding man and his family…at least not directly…and who will vote to confirm Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court of the United States.

The impact will not be on Kavanaugh who will most likely still get his way and be appointed for life to the United States Supreme Court. His family is not ruined. They will move on from this. But let me say, I am sad for his wife and daughters who are having to go through all of this because of their husband and father.

And yet, I do think there will be an impact. I think there already is a wave of change that has been gathering momentum and speed and depth and integrity and raw, composed rage. It's coming….just you wait.

For now, I will keep explaining and teaching and showing my boys what is right and wrong; what justice looks like; what respect looks like; what mercy looks like; what integrity looks like; and how Jesus instructs Christians to act.

From a different perspective, as a student of the law with a deep respect for the highest court in our land and for (most) of the justices who sit on the Supreme Court of the United States, I am greatly distressed, disappointed and frustrated. Putting aside whether he has repeatedly, on several topics, lied before Congress and whether he sexually assaulted one or more women, the person who has emerged under pressure in these hearings is NOT the kind of impartial, rational, discerning person the United States Senate should be placing on the Court. Our highest court of the land deserves better than this. We, the people of this democracy, deserve better than this.

My heart breaks and my blood boils for all people everywhere who have been hurt, broken, taken advantage of, assaulted, raped and have told their stories only to be threatened, ridiculed and worst of all, ignored.

I hear you. I believe you. You matter. You have made an impact. You are not alone. Everyone does eventually get his day in court; before his maker, that is.

Over and out…

Anna

The War Against Drugs {A Parent's Battle Cry}

This is your Brain. This is your Brain on Drugs….{Sizzle}…Any Questions?... Just Say No!

My 5 year old equates anything that happened "a long time ago" with "back in the '80s." I think that he probably pictures horse drawn wagons on dirt roads and no internet and rotary phones that plug into the wall when he says this; you know, the dark ages.

To me, the 80s weren't so long ago; my childhood resides there. It was a time of big, clunky station wagons without seat belts, Barbie dolls, running barefoot through summers that lasted forever, bikes with pompom tassels coming out of the ends of the handlebars, Star Wars, Ronald Reagan, Swatch Watches, Bon Jovi and cordless phones.

And in the 1980s, the U.S. launched several ad campaigns in combatting the war on drugs. Any child of the '80s will still know by heart the words and the images associated with these campaigns from the war on drugs.

I can easily recall these and hear the sizzle of the egg in the hot skillet, and it worked for me. Not that I would have been using drugs if it hadn't been for these ad campaigns, but it certainly made an impact.

It seems to me that little by little our society has forgotten about our full-on attack on drugs. I don't see billboards or t-shirts or print ads or commercials or YouTube videos or hashtags warning kids to Just Say No {to Drugs} or any other catch phrases warning against the perils of drugs, for that matter.

I don't have teenagers yet. So, maybe the kids are aware of the dangers of drugs and maybe the parents are having meaningful chats with their teenagers and schools are still fighting their way through the war on drugs, but when I see a headline about a girl in high school who died after ingesting a synthetic LSD and that 5 teenagers have been charged with murder in relation to it, I think that perhaps it's time to bring back the fried egg comparisons and launch another targeted attack.

The teenager's death I refer to occurred in Woodbury, Minnesota; a nice, upper middle-class suburb to the east of the Twin Cities full of professional, white collar families, living in spacious homes with well-manicured lawns.

But this upper middle-class suburb was not immune from illicit activity in its high school. This girl bought little strips of pink paper laced with a synthetic form of LSD from a kid at school who got it from another kid at school who got it from another kid at school who got it from…well, you get the picture. Eventually, these little pink papers were traced to a 19 year-old who was arrested with a big stash of little pink papers.

Unfortunately, for this girl, her experimentation with drugs killed her, and now, these kids have been charged with her murder.

The article describes her as a very smart, interesting, passionate, funny, gifted teenager. She made the mistake of trying drugs with a friend during a sleepover and that mistake killed her and has forever changed the lives of her family and friends, the kids charged {as adults} with her murder and their families and friends too.

I have never trifled with drugs….not ever. I have never even smoked a cigarette…I've never even thought about doing these things. I know that this is not necessarily the norm, but it's true of me. And honestly, I don't understand why anyone would want to take these risks of addiction, affliction and death. However, I do realize that many do take these risks whatever their reasons.

And so, I say, We, as Parents, need to declare war on drugs again. We need to have these talks often! We need to say over and over "Just Say NO!" until they hear it in their thoughts and say it themselves without hesitation! We need to stand up to bad influences and be vigilant when it comes to who our kids are hanging out with and what they are doing when we aren't around. We need to sacrifice an egg and show them, "This is your Brain. And this is your Brain on Drugs!"

We need not be afraid to speak to our kids about sensitive matters. We need to keep the lines of communication open. We need to be sure our kids know they can talk to us…about anything. We need to have a community for our kids and for us, as parents.

We need to be soldiers in this war on drugs. This war never really ended it was just placed on the back burner, temporarily blocked by other agendas and campaigns, but it's still there.

My heart breaks for this girl who lost her life, her family, the kids charged with murder and their families. There is so much loss in this situation; loss that never had to be. These kids had the power of choice, but made the wrong decisions and ended up here; this does not end well for any of them.

But WE, the parents, have the power of choice too. And I choose to pick up my battle gear and step onto the field and unabashedly fight this good fight to keep our kids safe, well-educated and confident when it comes to simply SAYING NO to drugs or bullies or any other unsavory behavior. What do you choose?

Whether you agree with the '80s ad campaign tactics or not, surely you can agree that parents have to be the ones to broach this subject with our kids and give them guidance and information regarding these matters.

And maybe I'm wrong and these parents did all these things and it didn't make a difference. Even still, I will be talking and talking and talking with my kids about drugs and many other things for many years to come. Over and out...

Anna

Related articles

Shades of Youth {Tanning and Teens and Cancer}

Dick.....Not just the Name of a Sporting Goods Store {They know more than you think}

Awash in Color: Boy Colors v. Girl Colors

An Open Letter to a Smug, Punk-Ass Twerp {AKA Justin Bieber}

Dear Smug, Punk-Ass Twerp, {And I mean that in the kindest way possible}

Wipe that stupid grin off your face! You are looking at some serious charges with your latest shenanigans.

If I were your mom, I would sit you down and have a serious talk with you before it's too late {of course, if I were your mom, we would have had many serious talks by now}.

You, sonny, have been given a gift. While I have no idea what you sing or what you sound like or why girls go wild for you, you must have some kind of talent. But your talent is not the gift. Many people have talent; a large number of people have a great deal more talent than you do {in my opinion}.

The gift is Opportunity. You have been given the opportunity to develop your talent; live your dreams; be a positive role model to look up to; travel the world; have amazing experiences; do things to help others and make a real difference in this world.

And yet, in your youthful, arrogant, ignorance you are squandering this gift. You make scenes everywhere you go; act like you are "somebody" with having done nothing; trash hotel rooms; drink alcohol {may I remind you, you are still a minor}; use drugs; race cars in residential streets; hurl insults and curse words at police officers; and expect to get away with all of it.

But let me tell you something, kid; you better straighten up your act soon! The world quickly tires at the escapades of such spoiled brats. There will always be another rotten, over-entitled teen "star" taking your place as your own star fades away.

If you continue slipping down this slope of over-indulgence and self-destruction your future is clear, but not bright or promising. You are a dime a dozen….so far. You are not special….yet.

So, Biebs, do you want to "be someone?" Do you want to "do something?" Do you want to be remembered for something other than your demise? Do you want to live to see the ripe old age of 30? Well, then GET YOUR ACT TOGETHER NOW!

Many have trod down that path; few have overcome the demons of wealth, of fame, of celebrity. This is your chance; take it or leave it. But don't wait long to decide; the window of redemption will not stay open long and certainly does not give superstar punks VIP treatment.

But take heart, you could still be a legend, regardless of which path you take. In fact, people {and cable TV} like to tell the stories of those poor, misguided, young souls who were eaten up by the world of sex and drugs and rock and roll and spit out as hollow shells of nobodies.

Is it really so hard to choose to do good for others, be a respectable, responsible and talented role model and live the good life of opportunity? For your sake, and your mom's sake, {and for all those screaming, fainting girls looking up to you} I hope you straighten up. And you can start by wiping that punk-ass smile off your baby face.

Over and out…

Anna

When to Call in the Big Guns {Seeking Professional Advice from a Lawyer}

Getting Past the Stereotype

"If you or a family member have been injured in a crash or as a result of using a defective product...."

When I hear these words I think sleazy personal injury attorney preying on people in tight spots. I know I'm not alone in this. In fact, you can probably recite these words and the words that follow them along with the name of a personal injury attorney who often advertises on the TV channels you watch.

Of all the types of lawyers, personal injury attorneys probably have the worst reputation. While there are some slimy attorneys (just as there are slimy people in every profession), and some of them do indeed practice personal injury law, there are also a good number of honorable attorneys.

These attorneys are there to help their clients recover money to live their lives and/or support their families after being severely injured or when a family member has been killed because of someone else's negligence.

Case by Case

The problem for many is knowing when to sue and when not to sue or even when to seek advice from an attorney. And often these questions involve a personal injury issue, but the uncertainty regarding seeking legal action may also involve family law issues, civil wrongs or even criminal charges.

I recently read an article about a woman who sued a former college professor because of the low grade he gave her in class. She claimed that grade was given based on a dispute between the two and had ruined her chances at getting higher paying jobs down the road and asserted that this one grade would cost her a million or more in lost future wages.

So....this is a not a good reason to sue {in my opinion}.

A few months ago, a friend told me about a co-worker who had just gotten a new car and then was involved in a car accident through no fault of her own. The co-worker was having neck pain and was having trouble getting the person's insurance to respond to her, but she felt bad about seeking out legal advice about what to do. She didn't want to be THAT person.

So....this is a good example of when legal action may be necessary.

Often, those who have a legitimate cause of action fail to seek legal advice because they don't want to cause trouble or feel like they would look like the aggressor or bad guy. However, many times it may require only a phone call or letter from an attorney to get an insurance company moving or stop certain behavior or modify an agreement, etc.

Our society does tend to be quite litigious; sometimes that's a good thing that leads to changes in laws or reduces future injuries or deaths through changes to industry standards or sheds light on bad practices or get the needed money and/or care that a person injured in an accident deserves or increases or decreases child support payments, etc. Other times it's a waste of money and court resources that leads to nothing more than a few headlines outlining the preposterous allegations.

Seeking Professional Advice

So, if you and/or your loved one have been injured in an accident or property has been damaged or a loved one has been killed or you have information regarding poor or dangerous industry standards or you have another legal quandary, should you talk to an attorney?

Well, to give you a lawyer's answer...that all depends... but here are a few tips for when it's a good idea to get an attorney:

1. You've been injured on the job, on the property of another (a private residence or commercial business), in a car accident, etc and the injury was caused by another's negligence or mostly by another's negligence or your property has been damaged and you aren't getting anywhere regarding a settlement of costs/damages;
2. A loved one has been injured or killed by another's negligence and there is a family to support or medical bills to pay or funeral expenses to cover;
3. The person or business that caused the injury (directly or indirectly) or their insurance company or attorney is giving you the runaround;
4. There will be long term effects from the injury that require much care at a great cost;
5. The same thing that happened to you could happen to other due to a poor industry standard or on-going negligence, etc.
6. Or another circumstance in which you are not receiving damages for a wrong done to you or loved one; or
7. You need to modify a family law order or need help with divorce proceedings or getting a will or other estate planning document prepared.

The Scoop

There are many reasons to seek out the advice of an attorney; some of them may lead to court. However, a lawsuit can be expensive, take a lot of time and cause much emotional and physical stress. It should not be entered into lightly. And yet, there are many situations that do require going to court in order to be resolved fairly.

Don't be fearful of the law or an attorney or the court. Over and out...

Anna

Random Tidbits: On a Rampage {Strong Opinions}

New Rules

I've been juggling a lot with work lately, which means that everything else suffers. So, I've decided to make some rules for myself, and I'm really trying to stick with it.

I'm setting weekly office hours. We're holding weekly family meetings with an agenda, a white board and an Angry Bird (that's a whole other post...stay tuned). I'm standing firm on what I can and cannot add to my overly stuffed schedule...and refusing to feel guilty about saying "No" when I need to.

Unfortunately, one of the things that has taken a backseat to being a priority lately has been writing. So, I'm trying this Random Bits style again...cuz you know I have things to say, but just not much time to get them said!

Bits and Pieces

1. Y'all know how I feel about using your phone and driving, right?! If you don't then read this: I Hit A Child with My Car and all the other Distracted Driving posts I've written. Well, my friend, Trina, a dedicated Phone Down, Eyes Up driver sent me this photo that her friend sent to her. I love it! And there's a lot of truth in this statement...believe it.
   
2. In DC, a Councilmember has introduced a bill to curb cheating. If passed, it would make facilitating cheating on standardized tests illegal. Now I'm certainly against cheating, but what troubles me is that there has to be such laws in place to prevent school personnel from tampering with tests.

   Shouldn't this be a given to teachers and administrators? Perhaps, the better answer is to take a look at why there is such a need to "fix" standardized tests in this district and examine the education resources and funding.

3. Apparently there is overcrowding at the Metro Louisville jail in Kentucky. The solution? Well, USA Today reports that "tech-savvy professionals will use technology and data to study the overcrowding," of course. The pros will be trying to find some possible solutions.

   News Flash! I've got a solution. Use that money to study how to get kids off the streets, keep them safe, educate them, and get them out of the cycle of committing crimes-jail-committing crimes-jail that many of their older siblings, parents, aunts and uncles and friends are in instead of employing "tech-savvy professionals." This is not an engineering/spatial problem; this is societal issue, a human interest story that could have happy ending.

4. Lastly, the total cost of the 2012 elections, from federal to state to local offices, was...hold on to your boots, friends... $7.3 BILLION (according to Politico.com)! WHAT A WASTE! Don't get me started on what that could have been spent on. This amount of money could have made a huge impact on many of the very causes and issues and institutions and families addressed by the candidates running for office. So many could have been greatly benefitted by even a fraction of this money being spent in a positive way. Here are more of my thoughts on the subject of political campaign spending.

The Scoop

Hmmm, it turns out I'm full of opinions this Monday morning. Well, there you have it. Over and out...

Anna

Sticky Messes: Good Guys v. Bad Guys {Biggest Gun Wins}

Cleaning up Messes

My kids are really good at making huge messes. They don't mean to; they're just busy playing, creating some playscape or making confetti or trying to help by pouring their own juice or milk.

The result is something sticky covering the floor, splattered on the counter and cabinets and inevitably on the boys themselves, bits of paper everywhere, pillows, blankets and stuffed animals scattered throughout the house, draping over this or that, pulling down lamps and picture frames.

I know I should make them clean up these disaster zones, but I know from experience generally their version of cleaning up a mess only results in bigger messes that make me a steaming, angry, stressed out mom; which is another type of mess altogether.

So, I banish them from the desecrated area, and I clean up the mess. They do have to clean up toys scattered about; it's just these sticky, dirty, destructive messes that I take over.

Yes, I know. You're shaking your head and thinking. "That's the way to spoil them and make them think they can get away with anything."

Perhaps, but it keeps me sane, and avoids the chance of a headline like this, "Mom loses mind, runs screaming from home, never to be heard from again after sons attempt to clean up spilled apple juice with down comforter, only to rip seam and allow all the feathers to float through house, adhering to all sticky surfaces covered in apple juice, including the boys and a giant dog."

Sometimes it's just better to step in and take control of a smaller, still fixable mess before it becomes a giant, sticky, slippery slope heading straight down the tubes.

Guns in Schools

A few days before Christmas I happened to see a newspaper headline, "NRA leader urges armed guards in every U.S. school." Surely not.

I read more. "The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," says NRA executive vice president, Wayne LaPierre. Hmmmm.

While I agree that gunmen on rampages who seem to all too often end up in schools of some level is a definite problem, I don't agree that throwing more guns into the mix is the answer.

The NRA's current plan is like standing to the side and watching my sons spill a gallon of apple juice all over the counter, the floor, the cabinets and themselves as they attempt to pour a small amount into a child-sized cup, then letting them clean it up with the socks on their feet and whatever else they can find to sop of the sticky liquid, leaving the residue behind to collect hair and dust and dirt, turning the whole thing into a filthy mess.

That doesn't solve or teach anything.

I realize that there are a number of schools in large cities that already have trained armed guards/off-duty police officers patrolling the halls, approximately one-third of public schools or 23,000 schools to be precise. I acknowledge this is necessary to keep the students in those schools safe, but I do not find this statistic to be an acceptable standard for schools.

Good Guys v. Bad Guys

This figure alone speaks volumes about the state of our country and the culture we live in. It saddens me to no end. But this proposed "solution" from the NRA enrages my faculties, breaks my heart and frightens me.

More guns, especially guns of the caliber and capacity that match those that the "bad guys" have access to do not belong in our schools. What lesson does this teach? The "bad guys" have big guns; well, the "good guys" will just get bigger guns.

Where does it end? Why stop at schools? How about movie theaters, churches, all government buildings, federal, state and city, malls, parks, the grocery store, libraries, parking garages, and every other public building? Perhaps it should be mandatory that every household owns an assault rifle. That ought to stop the "bad guys."

Of course, if we're all running around with guns all the time, that might make it difficult to tell the "bad guys" from the "good guys." Then what would the NRA propose?

Better Laws

I don't have all the answers, but I feel certain that adding more high powered weapons to our warped society is NOT the answer.

I am not advocating for all guns to be ripped from lawful gun owners' tight grasp. But I do support bans on assault rifles and high-capacity ammunition clips; weapons that belong only on a battlefield, if anywhere at all; weapons that can wipe out a great number of people in a few short seconds; weapons capable of ripping gaping holes in bodies and exploding through flesh and vital organs.

Weapons of this nature go far beyond hunting and "protecting" your home and family. If you oppose this type of ban, please explain to me the need for such devastating weapons.

Of course, bans are not the only aspects to be considered. Historically, horrible killing sprees that have taken place in schools, malls, churches, offices and theaters are carried out by people who have a mental illness of some sort. Therefore, mental illnesses, detection and treatment are also issues to be considered.

The Scoop

Call me naïve, but I don't want to live in a world where "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun." And I just don't think we have to live in such a world...if we wake up and proactively start dealing with this issue.

The current gun laws are not adequate. We don't necessarily need more laws, but better laws. I challenge our lawmakers to disregard the powerful, $12-billion-dollar-a-year gun industry and its puppet, the NRA and find a way that protects our citizens' safety and rights. Over and out...

Anna

God is with Us {Always and Everywhere}

In the aftermath of this horrible tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary School I have seen various posts on Facebook and scattered through articles saying this massacre has nothing to do with stricter gun laws. Instead, these posts, remarks, quotes insist we need to "put God back in schools."

These statements sadden and confound me.

I am a Christian. I love my Lord. It matters not where I go, my God is with me always and everywhere.

To me, these statements imply that since our schools are secular, God abandoned these children and teachers in their hour of greatest need; as if God couldn't step through those shattered glass doors because our government adheres to the separation of church and state, respecting all religions.

Pardon me, but that's not the God I know. No, I know God was in that school on Friday, December 14, 2012 at 9:40 am.

God stood at those locked school doors, weeping as the gunman {whom I refuse to dignify by mentioning his name} made his way toward the school, resolute in his gruesome mission. God was there in the hall giving strength and courage to Principal Dawn Hochsprung and School Psychologist Mary Sherlach as they lunged for the gunman in an effort to protect every child and teacher and staff member in the building.

God was there in each classroom as the teachers realized what those popping sounds in the hall were. God was there guiding the teachers, holding their hands and steadying their voices. God was there wrapping his arms around the frightened children huddled in darkened closets, corners of rooms and cramped bathrooms.

Rest assured God stood with those teachers in those two classrooms where all those young lives were suddenly and tragically taken from this earth. I'm sure God wept as he held their tiny, broken bodies. God was there when barricaded classes quietly prayed at the suggestions of students.

God was there, as the police began to arrive and quickly and efficiently combed through that school. God was there helping to lead the frightened and shocked students and teachers from the building.

God was there waiting for the terrified families to arrive at the school searching for their children, spouses, parents, siblings and friends; looking for the familiar faces; hoping for a comforting word. God was there holding up the parents, siblings and friends when those 26 didn't appear.

God was present at every prayer vigil and service that has been held for these lives taken. God is with the family of the gunman helping them to cope with this terrible burden. God walked alongside those first responders who witnessed the tragic result of a mad man with an assault weapon.

God remains with those families who have been forever wounded and altered. God stands in judgment of the gunman's soul. And God silently waits with us as we, as a nation, ask what can be done to prevent this from happening again.

God is always with us everywhere. That is what I believe as a Christian, and that is what I teach my children.

Evil does lay in wait; looking for the opportune moment to strike and cause us horrible pain; hoping we will say that God has forsaken us; plotting to turn us against one another; pointing out our differences and preying on our weaknesses.

I refuse to give Satan that satisfaction. For Jesus tells us in John 16:33, "In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world."

God is with us...always and everywhere!

Anna

Eats, Shoots and Leaves or Eats Shoots and Leaves? {That’s the Debate}

Whose Right to Bear Arms?

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

That is the 2^nd Amendment of the United States Constitution, as passed by Congress in late 1791.

It was a different time back then. I don't think anyone can argue with that. But that's about all we, as a country, can agree on when it comes to this 27 word sentence.

On Monday, there was another tragic shooting; this one in College Station, Texas. There were 2 people killed and several injured by a disgruntled home owner, as a city constable attempted to serve an eviction notice.

In our world of violence, it would be easy to pass this tragedy off and say, "well, it was only two people….this time." But to those two persons' friends and families, this is the worst news story they have ever heard.

Just a little over a week ago, a man went to a Sikh Temple during Sunday morning worship and opened fire, killing 6 people.

And less than a month ago, a man went into a dark movie theater and killed 12 people.

Of course, in each of these instances, there were people injured, as well.

When does this violence end?

The Governor's Rationale

After the College Station shooting, I read a long, rambling quote from Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, in which stated his argument for people's right to own and carry guns. Here is part of that quote,

"And Texas I will suggest to you by and large a majority of them, a large majority of them believe that law abiding men and women should be able to have their weapons and the criminals are never going to listen to the law, they're always gonna have weapons, whatever source they want, whether they're legal or illegal. And I think it's wise for the people of the state of Texas to be able to defend themselves when there is a law breaker that comes into their midst with a weapon."

I'll concede Perry two points: 1) He's probably right that most Texans feel this way; and 2) criminals are always going to find a way to get a weapon, and they don't care what the laws say.

But I think his reasoning is flawed.

Law Abiding Mass Murderers

If you think back over the years of all the terrible, senseless shootings in our country, you will find that most of these ruthless, selfish murderers had obtained their guns and ammunitions lawfully and were not breaking any laws by owning guns as they, themselves, were not lawbreakers until the very day they took multiple lives during their respective rampages.

The shootings are not committed by gang members, assassins, petty crooks or hardened criminals. Most often, these people are quite intelligent, but delusional or mentally unstable and fueled by hate for certain groups of people. Often these types of people are dismissed as quiet loners or quirky characters, but no one would ever have expected this person to do what he eventually does.

These types know how to go about obtaining guns and ammunitions legally; they plot and plan and wait and stock up. They are people who are protected by the 2^nd Amendment as it is interpreted today.

A Militia State?

Secondly, I'd like to point out that in none of these instances that I am aware of was the assailant shot by a regular Joe who just happened along upon a murderous scene and who happened to be packing heat, taking advantage of his 2^nd Amend. right, as the good governor from Texas would argue might happen if we are allowed to possess and carry guns.

Along that same line, I'm a bit confused by Perry's statement: "And I think it's wise for the people of the state of Texas to be able to defend themselves when there is a law breaker that comes into their midst with a weapon."

Is Perry suggesting that Texas is a militia state? A state where a body of citizens is armed and trained by the state that can take law enforcement into its own hands? Surely not.

Stand Your Ground

Of course things didn't quite work out this way for George Zimmerman of FL when he lawfully owned and carried a gun for protection in a neighborhood that had been repeatedly struck by thieves and home invasions. Zimmerman acted as Captain of the Neighborhood Watch and claims he acted in self defense under Florida's Stand Your Ground Law the night he shot and killed an unarmed young man. And yet, he is now standing trial for his actions.

Stand Your Ground laws do indeed protect those who "use force in self-defense when there is reasonable belief of a threat, without an obligation to retreat first." Under these laws, a person could even use deadly force without a duty to retreat, in some cases; and in those cases, these laws would be considered a defense or immunity against criminal charges or civil suits.

However, clearly sometimes a person might make a mistake about when he could legally use his gun and when he is breaking the law himself.

My point is that do we really want people carrying guns everywhere they go and making a split second decision whether what they think they are seeing is really what's going on? I think not, but I know this sentiment is not agreed upon across the board.

The Scoop

The problem is all in the way it was written and passed out to the states and eventually ratified by those states. It's only slightly different than the original version passed by Congress; but the difference is enough to make interpretation a bit dicey.

Here is the way the states' version is written and was subsequently ratified as:

"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Do you see the difference? It may appear subtle, but it makes a big difference. In fact, it's why there is such a debate over exactly what the right was intended to protect. If only there had been copying machines in 1791.

And lastly, when the 2^nd Amendment was written and passed, guns that could fire off hundreds of explosive rounds in a matter of minutes couldn't even be imagined, much less a machine that would make exact duplications of a piece of legislation. Over and out…

Anna

Poor Sense{r} of Judgment: Distracted by Self Preservation

Split Second Decisions

When faced with a decision to do the right thing or run, which would you do? Do you know?

It's easy to judge when you aren't in that situation. It's easy to say you'd never do that and how could she not know. But none of us were there; she alone was there.

And now a group of unbiased citizens have determined as best they could what happened that night and that her actions were criminal.

Lapse in Judgment

I'm talking about Amy Senser, the privileged wife of former Vikings star, Joe Senser.

What is undisputed is that late last summer she was driving her Mercedes-Benz SUV and in the dark of night struck and killed Anousone Phanthavong, a Thai Chef, on an exit ramp on I-94 in Minneapolis. Anousone was putting gas in his stalled car at the time. Senser's vehicle was heavily damaged from the impact, which is also undisputed.

Senser claims she didn't know she hit a person. She maintains she thought she had hit a large pothole or construction barrel or other construction debris in the area.

There are many sketchy details from the time surrounding the accident. She had been on the way to the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul to pick up her daughters and their friends from a concert, but she claims she became ill and called her husband and asked him to pick them up instead. She was apparently heading back home at the time of the accident.

Regardless of these facts, disputed or undisputed there remains two families forever altered. One family has lost a loved one forever; a life cut tragically short. The other family is left without a mother or wife at least for a while.

Everyone Loses

No matter how you look at this situation it's sad.

We can't know exactly what happened in those minutes leading to the death of Anousone. We don't know if Senser had been drinking; was heavily medicated due to a sinus infection and migraine; was looking at or using her phone; or simply negligent in operation of her vehicle and selfish in her decision to "save" herself by fleeing the scene.

Senser was found guilty of two counts of criminal vehicular homicide: failing to immediately call for help and leaving the scene of an accident. One of the questions the jury considered was whether a reasonable person would have pulled over to investigate what she had hit and check the damage of her vehicle. They decided that a reasonable person would have done that.

Why didn't Senser stop? Did she have something to hide? Was she intoxicated? We may never know the answers to these questions.

The Scoop

Once again, this case serves as a reminder that we can't be too careful while operating our heavy metal vehicles. It only takes a split second to destroy the lives of others and ourselves.

Senser will be sentenced in July; the convictions call for 4 years in prison. Had she made just a few different decisions on that evening Senser wouldn't have been on that exit ramp or had she simply pulled over and check out what she had hit and called authorities immediately, the outcome could have been very different for everyone.

Life happens in the blink of an eye. My thoughts and prayers are with all those affected by the events of that August evening. Over and out...

Anna

Crossing the Line: To Train Up a Child

A Different Point of View

Isn't it funny how time and age and experience change the way we see our favorite books and movies from our childhoods?

The other day some friends and I were discussing reading the Little House on the Prairie series to our own children. The series was a favorite of ours as children and aside from the nostalgia of reading these books there is a different perspective now; that of a parent.

We were musing over how well behaved the children were and how well they listened to their parents and followed directions; carrying out many difficult chores day in and day out; and all with just a few handmade toys and no DVDs. What made these children so hard-working and obedient?

Of course, times have changed...a lot. But for one thing, there was corporal punishment; and the kids knew this and expected it. There was a certain amount of fear mixed with respect when it came to their parents.

Today, as I discussed in yesterday's post, there are many different schools of thought about the best way to discipline and raise a fine, upstanding, well-behaved child. However, there is a point where so-called discipline crosses the line and becomes abuse; even murder. There is a book that has been the cause of concern for parents, social workers and prosecutors in the last several years.

Excuse to Abuse

This book advocates for using spankings on children as young as 6 months old to train them to submit to authority; to essentially break children in the same style that the Amish break their stubborn mules. Michael Pearl self-published his book, To Train Up a Child, and it has become popular in ultra-conservative homes, especially in Christian homeschooling households.

This book, which suggests using a switch for spanking a child in one example, describes how to use a quarter-inch flexible plumbing line for hitting the arms, legs or back and even advocates for periodic fasting for children, has now been linked to the deaths of several children. These children all died at the hands of their parents after being systematically beaten, most with the plumbing tubing mentioned by Pearl, having food withheld from them and subjected to other means of "discipline" supported by Pearl. Pearl's book was found in the homes of each of these children.

When Discipline Becomes Abuse

This is not to say that the book is to blame for these parents lashing out and killing their kids in an attempt to train them to submit to their authority. The parents are to blame. However, these parents had been led to believe that such behavior is acceptable. It is not.

Pearl has said it's not his fault if delusional, mentally ill parents took the wrong idea from his book. I think they understood his general principles and they just took it a step further, which resulted in the death of their children.

I would say it is never, not even once, acceptable to hit your child on the arms, back and legs with a switch, rubber tubing or any other instrument. This is abusive behavior that will only teach your child to fear and hate you.

The parents who followed Pearl's book, albeit extreme cases of following his teachings, were indicted for murder and are serving prison sentences now. Their discipline was most certainly actually physical and mental abuse. Their praying during or in between beatings does not make it alright either.

The Scoop

There is a wide expanse between parents who use spankings as a way to discipline their children and parents who withhold food and use various instruments to hit their children in the name of discipline. If you feel that you need clarification of where the line is drawn between discipline and abuse, see this link to the U.S. Administration for Children and Families.

Abuse in the name of discipline is still abuse. Abuse is a criminal offense. Abuse hurts everyone.

Teaching respect, trust and reason makes for a stronger, kinder, more confident child and adult. Over and out...

Anna

Restraining Facebook Comments: Two Courts & Two Outcomes

A Change of Status

About a month ago, my Dear Husband Will was closing one Facebook account and attempting to migrate all his friends, connections, information, traffic, etc. over to a different Facebook account. In so doing, before shutting down the one account he changed his relationship status from "married" to "single" as he added me as his wife on his other account.

One would not have thought this would cause such a stir, but it did. On his original account, Will immediately got messages and comments from concerned and well-meaning friends when his status showed up as "Single" in his friends' streams. Will wasn't sure why everyone was so concerned until he realized what he had done.

He quickly assured everyone we were indeed still {happily} married and quickly updated his relationship on his newer account. All of this was unbeknownst to me until I noticed that my Timeline had been updated to reflect that I had just married Will on that day in January 2012.

Again, well-meaning friends who knew better than to believe that update posted messages of congratulations under that relationship update. I had seen a notification to confirm I was married to Will and had done so, but didn't think much of it until he relayed this whole story to me.

Conversations Streams

We use Facebook to share lots of information whether good, bad, game changing, mundane, of interest to all, of interest to only a few. Some people are more laid back about their security levels and who they allow to see the information they post and how much of this information is available to people they haven't approved and granted "friend" status to yet.

People use their Facebook accounts for different reasons. Some use it as a networking tool for business. Others view it as an extension of hanging out with friends at a bar or coffee shop; friends sharing information and opinions. Some people are guarded about what type and how much information they share on this platform, even among friends. Others share just about every thought that crosses their minds; or so it seems.

Regardless of how each of us chooses to use his or her social media outlets, we are all tuned in and we listen to what our "friends" are saying. We react, respond and form opinions based on this information, as illustrated in the above example.

Harassment on Facebook

Courts are still trying to figure out how social media fits with the law. There were recently two cases involving Facebook posts; one from Minnesota and one from Ohio. These cases involve different circumstances and have different outcomes.

Olson v. LaBrie

In this case, Olson found that his uncle had posted old family photos and made mean and disrespectful comments regarding those photos. Olson emailed his uncle requesting the photos and comments be removed or altered to remove Olson; LaBrie refused to do so. Olson eventually filed an application for a Harassment Restraining Order (HRO) against LaBrie.

The district court found that LaBrie's actions did not constitute harassment and did not grant the HRO. Olson appealed and the appellate court agreed with the district court's ruling.

The Court of Appeals of Minnesota held that, "To constitute harassment, words must have a substantial adverse effect on the safety, security, or privacy of another. Minn. Stat. § 609.748, subd. 1(a)(1). Comments that are mean and disrespectful, coupled with innocuous family photos, do not affect a person's safety, security, or privacy—and certainly not substantially so."

So, in the end Facebook was not a component in this case. Regardless of where the photos and rude comments were, they simply didn't constitute harassment under the MN statute.

Byron v. Byron

In this Ohio dissolution case, the Facebook statement made by the husband against the wife who already had a temporary protection order in place due to an incident of domestic violence from June of 2011, was considered to be in violation of the TPO.

In November of 2011, Mr. Byron posted to his Facebook account the following statement: "If you are an evil, vindictive woman who wants to ruin your husband's life and take your son's father away from him completely -- all you need to do is say that you're scared of your husband or domestic partner and they'll take him away!"

Mrs. Byron became aware of this statement even though she is blocked from his account and filed a motion stating he was in violation of the TPO. The TPO restricted Mr. Byron "from causing plaintiff or the child of the parties to suffer physical and/or mental abuse, harassment, annoyance or bodily injury."

The magistrate ruled that Byron had violated the TPO and sentenced him to 60 days in jail and $500 fine or in lieu of this sentence he could pay back child support and post an apology on his Facebook page for 30 days beginning February 13, 2012. The magistrate wrote the apology into the order and required Byron keep his Facebook page active during that time.

Byron complained about free speech issues, but the magistrate reminded him that while we do have the right of free speech, there are limitations; we can't just say anything.

The Byron case is not over. This case will return to court on March 19^th. Once the case is concluded, Byron may choose to appeal the court's ruling on this and/or other grounds. This is certainly one to keep an eye on.

The Scoop

As I said, both of these involve statements made on Facebook. Both have very different outcomes. So, which one is right? Well, both could be. Each state can have different standards and different language regarding various areas of the law.

However, regardless of what the law says in your state, the rule of thumb when it comes to social media is kind of like the old adage, measure twice, cut once. That is to say, think twice before posting what's on your mind; asking yourself will this harm, offend, harass, frighten, disrespect anyone?; and then hit enter once.

We certainly do have the right to say many things and post those things on Facebook if we wish, but if it's harmful, offensive, disrespectful, etc. expect that some may block you, tell the person you are making remarks about, unfriend you on Facebook and maybe in real life too and perhaps even take the matter to court. This open forum does not give you an unfettered right to say ANYTHING that comes to mind. Over and out...

Anna

F is for Fear: Bad School Policies Affecting Good Kids {On a Soapbox....on a Tuesday}

School Contraband

I really hate the stories about the students, mostly boys, who once at school discover they have accidently brought a toy gun or small pocket knife in their backpack, book bag, lunch box or coat pocket; who report this to the teacher because the student knows this is contraband that shouldn't be at school; only to be tossed out of school and receive a record of bringing a "weapon" to school and a school suspension.

A boy from Georgia did just this a week or so ago. While in chess club, the 13 year old middle school student, discovered the 1.5 inch knife in the military style bag his aunt bought at a yard sale and gave him as a Christmas gift. The boy, upon discovering this knife, immediately alerted his teacher. His reward for this honest act? A 4-day, in-school suspension.

The Wrong Message

I can't tell you how angry this story and others like it make me. Disciplining an honest, well-meaning child in this way teaches two negative lessons: 1) don't tell the truth and 2) justice is a fraud.

We tell our children to tell the truth; honesty is the best policy. We tell our children that justice will prevail; the innocent will be free and the guilty punished.

And yet, our schools have responded to isolated incidents of evilness with fear. This fear has caused them to write harsh and unfair policies regarding ANY "weapons" brought to school, whether real or perceived, under ANY circumstances.

Lessons Learned

These school policies teach children to hide the truth {and the contraband} should they make such a discovery in their bags or pockets. These policies teach children that mens rea, or intent, doesn't matter, motives are unimportant, they are guilty by association and the school need not have any evidence to present against them to be found guilty of this "crime." These are lessons our students will learn at a young age and take with them all through school and into their adulthood.

We have thrown out the common sense response to the self-reporting of accidently {or unbeknownst to the student, as in this case} bringing a toy weapon or small knife to school. The response in such cases should be kind and appreciative. We should applaud and welcome those who come forward to admit the mistake and turn in the contraband; then remind all the students of the dangers of having any weapons, toy or otherwise, at school for a variety of reasons and tell them to carefully check their bags and remove any such items before coming to school.

The Scoop

Schools, in trying to protect the students, have instead hurt some of the "good" students. These policies are bad. These kinds of stories almost always make the news because they are unjust policies. Why must we punish the truthful, rule-following, upstanding students? The simple answer is Fear.

Fear controls much of how we run our lives. We must overcome fear and recognize the difference between students who are a threat and in need of intervention and students who are well-meaning, good kids, who sometimes make and honest mistake. Over and out...

Anna

Too Dangerous to Consume? Hazards of Doing the Dew & Having Some Wip at the Reddi

Considering Junk Food

At this time of year, the start of one year before us and the food-laden holidays and past year behind us, many of us take stock of our diet and exercise routines. We all know which foods we should be filling our diets with, but why is it that ALL seriously delicious, crave-worthy foods are terrible for us? It seems like a really cruel joke.

Although I think that on the whole I eat pretty well, I am often snared by the chocolate traps and can fall very far down in the ooey, gooey, rich chocolate pit {which I don't necessary think of as bad thing}. At least chocolate does have a number of redeeming qualities, which I have mentioned to you before.

However, there are other foods sitting on grocery store shelves looking very innocent, indeed; that are actually deadly {to a mouse} or could be used illegally. How could these corrosive, dangerous items be legal to sell? These junk foods are actually quite often consumed. It might surprise you when you find out what I'm talking about.

Last week, I happened upon two stories regarding food items and the law. Each story is completely different from the other, but both are interesting.

Whipped Topping No Laughing Matter

In the first instance, last week in St. Cloud, MN, a 23 year-old male was arrested driving while impaired from a hazardous substance after he crashed his car into a pole. What was this substance? Well, inside the vehicle were numerous cans of whipped topping.

My first reaction was "what, you can sniff whipped topping?" How crazy is that? Well, as it turns out whipped topping is included on the list of dangerous inhalants.

While the whipped topping contains mostly fat and sweeteners {and no cream}, it also contains nitrous oxide gas. You may be more familiar with its other name, "laughing gas." Yep, that's right; nitrous oxide is the same stuff your dentist might administer to you as an anesthetic. This gas aids in the dispensing of the whipped topping and whipping it at the same time.

There are actually a number of household items that are can be inhaled. Some you are quite aware of, but others may surprise you. They are categorized as gases (nitrous oxide, propane tank gas, chloroform, whipped topping, gases from a refrigerator, etc.) aerosols (contained in spray bottles, such as hair spray, vegetable oil sprays, spray paint, etc.), nitrites (often contained in cleaning products, leather cleaners and scented air fresheners; butyl, amyl and cyclohexyl) and volatile solvents (Often found at home, in schools and in the work place, including glues, paint thinner, degreasers, felt-tipped markers, etc).

Not many consumables on that list. Did you take a good look at other items in the same category as the whipped topping? I bet you'll think twice the next time you spray whipped topping on your pie? But seriously, would you really want to eat this product again?

Do the Dew or Maybe Not

The second story involves a lawsuit. A man alleges he found a mouse in his Mountain Dew. He says he sent the mouse remains he found in his Dew to the folks at PepsiCo for analysis and they destroyed the mouse. The lawyers for PepsiCo came back with an argument that isn't quite what you might expect.

They say that if a mouse had indeed ended up in a Mountain Dew container, the soda would have dissolved the mouse into a jelly-like substance before the consumer ever opened the container; approximately 15 months after bottling. Hmmm. Well, that makes me want to drink this pop.

Let's ponder that for a minute. I'm not talking about a cleaning substance or poison or toxic substance that could dissolve a mouse. I am talking about a consumable; a beverage. OK, so it looks like toxic waste and tastes a bit like what I would imagine Windex might taste like, but still many people do "Do the Dew" quite often.

So, here's the skinny: Mountain Dew contains citric acid that is corrosive enough to destroy teeth and bones in a matter of months {if soaked in the liquid}, as noted by several studies. While citrus fruit juices have more citric acid and the rate of decay of teeth and/or bones would be the same; at least there is vitamin C in the fruit juices. So, will Mountain Dew kill you? Well, it's not going to dissolve your teeth and bones; unless you soak in it for a couple of weeks; and it's not known to be corrosive on your "innards". For the record, I'm not taking any chances.

The Scoop

At the risk of sounding like a food snob, I don't consume these particular foods, and I have to admit I'm really glad I don't'. So, there you have it; a few interesting legal issues involving foods under inconsumable circumstances. Over and out...

Anna

Twas the Night Before Christmas: Motherly Law Style

Twas the night before Christmas,

When all thro' the house,

Not a creature was stirring,

Except for the Mom;

The stockings were hung

By the chimney with care,

Full to the brim with Angry Bird pencil toppers, Pez dispensers, chocolate, Squinkies and socks;

The children were nestled all snug in their beds,

While visions of superheroes and pirates danced in their heads,

And Dad in his fleece had just started to snore—

When out on the lawn

There arose such a clatter,

I sprang from my work to see what was the matter.

Away to window I flew like a flash,

Peeked out of the blinds

And checked the triple locked door.

The moon shining down on the brown grass below

Gave no reflection at all;

When, what to my squinting eyes, peering into the darkness, should come into sight

But 8 plastic yard reindeer attached to a broken down sleigh,

With a little, middle-aged driver, so wobbly and slow,

I knew in a moment he must be drunk.

More rapid than eagles these reindeer were not.

And he whistled, and shouted, and call'd them by name:

"Now! Jack {Daniels}, now! Jim {Beam}, now! Jose {Quervo}, and Crown,

On! Bailey{'s}, on! Bud {weiser}, on! Malibu and Captain {Morgan}"

"To the top of the porch! To the top of the wall!

Now dash away! dash away! dash away all!"

As dry leaves before a wild hurricane fly,

When they meet with an obstacle...really, what does this line have to do with Christmas?

Regardless, up to the house-top those coursers did not try;

With a tired old sleigh and a tipsy St. Nick, those plastic reindeer didn't move an inch.

And then in a twinkling I heard on the window pane

The tapping and rapping and prying and tugging and struggling of that drunk Santa.

As I stood against a wall in the shadows, and reached for my Smartphone from the pocket of my flannel pajamas,

That fake Santa opened the window and climbed in with much difficulty:

He was dress'd all in synthetics,

from his head to his foot,

And his clothes were all tarnish'd

With chili cheese fries and root beer {say it like a Minnesotan and root rhymes with foot, kind of};

An empty bag he had flung over his back,

And he reminded me of...well, the Grinch

Just opening his {empty} sack:

His eyes – oh, how bleary!

His dimples very un-merry and really more like scowls,

Now, his cheeks were like roses

And his nose like a cherry {because of the liquor};

His droll little mouth was

Drawn down in a frown.

And the beard of his chin

Was as red as the nose on a clown;

The stump of a pipe he held tight in his teeth

And the smoke was thick and stinky,

Messing up my freshly cleaned house.

He had a broad face, and a

Big round belly

That bumped into my treasures and trinkets as he tread across my floor;

He was chubby and plump,

A right sad old elf,

And I dialed 911 when I saw him

In spite of my staring

A droop of his hand and nod of his head

Soon gave me to know I had nothing to dread.

He spoke not a word, but

Went straight to sleep.

As he sank into my couch in his filthy old suit,

He turned on his side and began to saw logs.

Giving a nod {to the police} as they arrived at my home,

Out he was dragged before

He could awaken and make haste out the door to escape.

Once revived by fresh air, he sprung into action,

To his team {of plastic reindeer} gave a whistle,

But alas, to no avail, those old yard decorations gave no heed,

And away the cops took him, as fast as they'd descended upon

My humble abode,

But I heard him exclaim, ere he drove out of sight-

Merry Christmas to you, and I'm not the real Claus, just an imposter.

Well, I'll have you know that fake Santa was booked, jailed and bailed,

Then charged, put on trial and convicted

Of the theft of 8 plastic yard reindeer and one antique miniature sleigh,

Disorderly conduct {based on his action at the bar prior to the theft of holiday decor},

And breaking and entering of a residence,

For which he received quite generous sentence in exchange for the promise

That that red-bearded elf would never play Santa again.

And, the red and white Santa Claus suit?

He swears it came in the mail,

Addressed to K. Kringle at his address penned beneath.

He donned it for a lark, but liked its affect

And wore it out for the night of pre-Christmas delight.

Alas, his folly got bold and he landed in prison, abject.

Over and out....Happy Christmas Eve!

Anna

Choose Your Side Carefully: A Word to the Students of Penn State {On a Soapbox}

Kill the Messenger?

Hold the stinkin' phone. I just found my soapbox. I had been planning to note the various sad, ludicrous state of affairs repeated over and over again on every news medium concerning myriad subjects. Then, I read that Mike McQueary, the one-time grad student who gave the most damning testimony before the grand jury, had been sidelined and won't be at tomorrow's Penn State game due to threats. In fact, PSU has now placed him on administrative leave.

I was already quite disappointed to read how a number of the PSU student body reacted to the firing of Head Coach Joe Paterno by rioting in the streets. This demonstration was ridiculous. Paterno may have met his legal obligation, but his moral compass was off....perhaps for a good many years, with regards to Jerry Sandusky.

What I can't find is additional information about the threats received by McQueary, and who is threatening him. My assumption is that it's past and/or present students and diehard fans who have misplaced their fury involving this far reaching university shakedown.

Making Sense of It All

The anger, resentment and disgust should be placed firmly on the shoulders of Sandusky. The disappointment falls to the PSU administrators who knew of these sick and illegal actions perpetrated by Sandusky, but did nothing to stop it and failed to alert authorities to these crimes. Sadness shelters these vulnerable boys, known as victims 1 – 8. The utter disbelief goes to students who reacted so inappropriately at the news of the PSU Trustees' decision to fire Paterno and the University President.

How deep with festering sore reaches into the heart of this University is yet to be seen, but this must serve as a reminder to all of us that when we see or hear of an injustice, an inappropriate action or questionable situation, we must not turn a blind eye simply because we can't believe it, because it might be difficult for a family, a church, a business, the adoring public, a school to accept or that it will bring down a respected, prestigious, wealthy, well-known figure. These are excuses and are irrelevant.

The focus must be on what is right and wrong; whether a person is being harmed; whether some wrongdoing is afoot. It matters not who is committing the crime; no one is above the law. And eventually that person will be exposed for who he or she really is and this might mean bringing down a whole institution, but so be it.

A Message to the Students

To the students of PSU*, don't be fools; stand on the right side of this playing field. It takes a strong person to support the weak, the unheard, the forgotten; it takes weak, insignificant, superficial person to say we don't care about the morals, the crimes, the children; the game must be won at all costs. So, students of PSU, one day when you have children, what will you think of your actions? What will you tell your children about this chapter of your college career? There is still time to rectify your misguided stance. I believe you are better than this; prove me right. Over and out...

Anna

*I realize that PSU is a very large campus and not all of the students are acting in this way, but these few are destroying the image of the student body as a whole.

Falling Into the Reflecting Pool: Narcissistic Criminals

What Would You Do?

There is a saying that goes something like this, "What would you attempt to do if you knew you couldn't fail?" It is usually meant to inspire people to aspire to great things. Well, I have a slightly different question. What would you do if you knew you would get away with it?

After reading too many articles about greatly accomplished people who have money, status, respect and influence who eventually fall from grace and into criminal court, I have come to ask this question: what makes a person who has wealth, prestige and power commit a crime? Is it the belief that all that he has will redeem him of his crimes? Is it that he truly believes he is immune from criminal charges and above the law? Is it that he thinks no one could possibly believe that he, such a fine person, would commit horrible crimes? Or could it be something else?

Criminals at the Top

Yes, I realize I have used the masculine word "he" in the above paragraph. It's not that I don't think women would or could commit such crimes, they have. But the instances that come to my mind are overwhelmingly men. Just in the last few days, I have read several such articles and when I think back further over the years, the list seems endless; there are athletes, politicians, lobbyists, celebrities, businessmen and socialites.

Yes, I realize that people of all walks of life, regardless of the amount in the bank account, the size of the investment portfolio or the person's background, education, upbringing, religious beliefs, gender, profession or lack thereof commit all kinds of crimes. And there is almost always a question of why regardless of whom it is that commits the crime.

But to me, the most baffling are those who seem to have it all and then lose it all because they chose to break the law; those who are already in the limelight and more closely scrutinized even before allegations of crime emerge; those who are in leadership positions; those who command great respect; those who hold great monetary power.

Greed

My theory is that greed, pure and simple greed, is at the heart of this matter. The more you have, the more you want. The more you have, the easier it is to get what you want. The more you have, the bigger your ego. The more you have, the less you care about others.

The high and mighty do not steal to cover basic needs or provide for their families. They, generally, are not mentally deranged. They are not modern day Robin Hoods. They simply do it because they think they can. They do it because they don't care about how their crimes will affect others around them. They do it because they want to and it will benefit them in some way.

Narcissism

My hypothesis is that these people are narcissistic. Narcissism is quite complex, and just what it entails seems to depend on whom you ask, but basically it's inflated self-importance, lack of concern with what happens to others and a highly developed sense of entitlement. Put these things together and you could have a criminal mastermind.

Oddly enough it's probably these narcissistic traits that helped these people rise to the top of their respective professions. And sadly, it's these traits that will aid them in rebuilding their fame and fortune even after they serve their time and pay their fines and drop from view for a short period of time.

Almost all will return to the public eye and many with a spot on TV or a book or two in which they get to talk about themselves. What a surprise. After all, another characteristic of narcissism is a lack of shame.

The Scoop

The above description of narcissism sounds like a young child: self-centered, selfish, and self-important. The world revolves around the toddler. Fortunately, most kids grow out of this self centric universe and realize that others have feelings and needs and develop a sense of responsibility, service and compassion. Those who don't may grow up to be the president, a corporate giant, a celebrity and perhaps a criminal. Over and out...

Anna

A Fine How Do You Do: Theft or Slip of the Mind? {On a Soapbox}

Where to Draw the Line

It's against the law to take anything you haven't paid for from a store. It doesn't matter whether the item cost $2 or $20,000; it's still a crime. Some people do steal. And when they do they should be punished. But sometimes people make a simple mistake. Sometimes it's just a slip of the mind.

Should that person still be punished? Or should that person be able to pay for the item that he or she forgot to pay for, but meant to, and go on about his or her business?

Before you answer that question, let me tell you a story.

Welcome to Hawaii

A family moves from CA to HI, after a few weeks, they are still trying to figure out their new surroundings. The mom, dad and almost 3 year old daughter take the bus to the grocery store, getting lost in the process, finally arriving at a Safeway.

The mom is 30 weeks pregnant. She is famished; the whole family is hungry since they got lost and their trip to the grocery store took much longer than expected. As they shop, they pick up two chicken salad sandwiches, open the packages, saving the wrappers for the checkout line, and eat the sandwiches in plain view.

The family finishes shopping, pays for their groceries and exits the store. At this point, store security approaches them. It is at this point that the couple realizes they forgot to pay for the sandwiches they ate. They offer to pay the $5 for the sandwiches, but are taken to the manager's office.

Again, they try to pay for the sandwiches, explaining what happened. The manager refuses to allow them to pay for the sandwiches, citing store policy regarding theft. Instead, the store manager called the police. Four hours later, the police arrive.

The police arrested the mom and the dad, and child protective services arrived to take the almost 3 year old into custody. The mom kept her composure until her little girl was gone. At that point, she became hysterical, got sick and threw up due to her concern for her child who had never spent a night away from them.

The police booked them, took mug shots and then released the two on a $50 bond each. The parents walked back to Safeway, retrieved their groceries and walked home. At this point, it was almost midnight. The couple sat up that night waiting for the first minute they could get their daughter back. Eighteen hours after their little girl was taken from them, she was returned.

They retained an attorney. And at the attorney's advice went to the media about this. Safeway's corporate office is backpedaling fast.

My Take

Where's the humanity? I got sick to my stomach and tears welled up in my eyes as I read this account. I placed myself in this mom's shoes and I know that could have very well have been me. My heart went out to her thinking about her child being taken away from her by a person who her daughter did not know, having never spent the night away from mom and dad.

Who among us, especially while pregnant, has not opened a package of food for us or our child while shopping? And who among us, especially while pregnant, has not had a slip of the mind while running errands, particularly with a child?

I am all for punishing crimes; crimes of any degree. But there was no intent here; there was no crime here.

Safeway, have a heart; have some decency; listen to your paying customers. They may have a valid explanation. I don't have any Safeways around me, but you can bet your beans that if I did, I wouldn't give them any of my business ever again.

Safeway, this is the kind of debacle people remember. This kind of thing makes me fighting mad! Let me tell you another story, with a different flavor.

Several days ago, I saw a tweet from someone that said her aunt in MA was having back trouble and had phoned her local grocery store and asked if they could help her out. They took her list, shopped, checked out, bagged and delivered her groceries to her; all just because they value their customers.

I tweeted this woman's niece to ask her what grocery store it was. She said it was a small, local store and they didn't even have a website, but she was volunteering to create one for them since they had been so nice to her aunt.

Now that's good customer service. Trust others; give people the benefit of the doubt; have some humanity! You just might be wearing the other shoe one day and need human kindness yourself. Now, how would you answer the question? Theft or slip of the mind? Over and out...

Anna