| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|||
|
|||
In article > , "Dimitri"
> wrote: > "Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message > > Later, son Chris says to me, "Mom, I thought you were supposed to > > learn morals at home." > LOL - From the mouths of babes..... > > Dimitri Yeah, but did you like the Morel soup recipe? "-) -Barb, preparing for tonight's shindig at The Governor's Residence. Woo-hoo! Picture of my basket is on my website in the Pickle Hat section. I've got bread dough raising now and will do the brownies in a couple hours. They'll be in the basket, too. As will a jar of yesterday's Apricot Jam with a label saying, "It's obscenely delicious -- the Vice Squad is on the way!" -- -Barb, <http://www.jamlady.eboard.com> 6/6/05 Sam I Am! June 25, 1945: Me and Carly Simon. I wonder if she makes jam. (It's not too early to shop -- good chocolate and cheap gin. Or is it cheap chocolate and good gin? I never remember. No jam--coal to Newcastle and all that. "-) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Melba's Jammin' > said:
>For all that, you don't want to know how >many times I've written a check for over the amount and the cashier >never looks at the amount. Doesn't give me change until I mention it. >Makes me want to write a check for LESS than the amount and see if they >catch THAT. I had the following printed on my checks, right above the signatu PLEASE COMPARE MY SIGNATURE TO MY DRIVER'S LICENSE. Exactly *one* person has done that. Carol -- CLICK DAILY TO FEED THE HUNGRY United States: http://www.stopthehunger.com/ International: http://www.thehungersite.com/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article . com>,
"Sheldon" > wrote: > That's a sad comment, were you home schooled? Then you haven't a clue. > Home schooling is an antiquated concept held by some obstinate > agenda-driven simple minded who'd wish to return to the simpler times > when there was nothing else... home schooling is a last resort, like > canned chow mein and frozen pizza, immediate satisfaction but without > depth or breadth. Home schooling is in modern times a devise of those > who would shield their children from the real world... they are the > idiots, the FEARFUL IDIOTS... scared to death that their children will > discover how ignorant their parents truly are. A good parent wants > their chidren to exceed them, not hold their children back. > Sheldon May be an antiquated concept, but it's a growing practice. My nephew and wife have home-schooled seven kids through at least junior high. Oldest is on his way to a mechanical engineering degree; next one is a CPA in Minneapolis; others are still in school I think. Nice kids. Can carry on a conversation with an adult. I look forward to seeing them at the family reunion in a couple weeks. Sidebar: A friend remarked to me that in a large public setting, she can pick out the kids who are home schooled. She said they're better mannered, more polite, more respectful, etc. OK. So the next day a youngster and his mom watched me do my egg thing and the boy asked good questions, was polite, etc. I asked where he went to school. He said he was home-schooled. I thought it was interesting. * Exported from MasterCook Mac * Fruity Barbecue Sauce Recipe By : posted to rec.food.cooking by Barb Schaller 6-16-2005 Serving Size : 1 Preparation Time :0:00 Categories : Condiments Amount Measure Ingredient -- Preparation Method -------- ------------ -------------------------------- 1/4 cup chopped onion 3 cups peeled and sliced fruit 1/2 cup sherry 2/3 cup packed dark brown sugar 2/3 cup chili sauce or catsup 1/4 cup cider -- fruit, or white wine vinegar 2 tsp. dry mustard 1 tsp. Worcestershire sauce 1 Tbsp. molasses 1/2 tsp. Tabasco sauce 1/2 tsp. salt Place onion in food processor or blender; process until finely chopped. Add fruit and process until pureed. Combine all ingredients in a 3-4 quart (or larger) microwave-safe bowl. Stir. Cover bowl with plastic wrap, leaving vent. Microwave on high (100%) for 9-10 minutes or until mixture reaches a boil. Stir, reduce power to medium (50%) and microwave for 15 minutes, uncovered, stirring every 5 minutes. Ladle into sterile containers. For immediate use, pour into sterile jars or containers. Keeps several weeks refrigerated. For longer storage, let sauce cool slightly before ladling into freezer containers. Seal. Keeps 6-8 months frozen. If fresh fruit is out of season, frozen or canned fruit may be substituted. Fruit that is unsweetened or packed in natural juice is preferable. Great on ribs. Can be made with apricots, papayas, peaches, pears or nectarines. Makes about 3 half pint jars. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - NOTES : Source: Page 90, Easy Microwave Preserving, copyright 1992 by Cynthia Fischborn and Cheryl Long, The Globe Pequot Press. From Hennepin County Library, 8/2/94. FURTHER NOTE: I'm not sure that this is acidic enough for waterbath processing for canning. And I've never made it. _____ -- -Barb, <http://www.jamlady.eboard.com> 6/6/05 Sam I Am! June 25, 1945: Me and Carly Simon. I wonder if she makes jam. (It's not too early to shop -- good chocolate and cheap gin. Or is it cheap chocolate and good gin? I never remember. No jam--coal to Newcastle and all that. "-) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
> > -Barb, preparing for tonight's shindig at The Governor's Residence. > Woo-hoo! Picture of my basket is on my website in the Pickle Hat > section. I've got bread dough raising now and will do the brownies in a > couple hours. They'll be in the basket, too. As will a jar of > yesterday's Apricot Jam with a label saying, "It's obscenely delicious > -- the Vice Squad is on the way!" I found the letter and the invitation, but no picture of the basket. What happened?  ( |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 10:43:15 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> preparing for tonight's shindig at The Governor's Residence. > Woo-hoo! Picture of my basket is on my website in the Pickle Hat > section. I've got bread dough raising now and will do the brownies in a > couple hours. They'll be in the basket, too. As will a jar of > yesterday's Apricot Jam with a label saying, "It's obscenely delicious > -- the Vice Squad is on the way!" Where is the picture of your basket? I only found the invitation. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Melba's Jammin'" > wrote in message ... <snip> > > Yeah, but did you like the Morel soup recipe? "-) As in the dialog form Fargo " Ya you betcha". ;-) (one of my favorite all time movies) Dimitri |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote: > In article . com>, > "Sheldon" > wrote: > > > Damsel wrote: > > > Ranee Mueller > said: > > > > > > > Wow. Someone e-mailed me to tell me that there is no such thing as > > > >homeschooling and that failing to put my kids in preschool was the same > > > >as child abuse. Even if I agreed with the first premise, which I don't, > > > >I just don't think I am up to doing all of the kids' schooling, I cannot > > > >fathom how missing out on sandboxes and fingerpaints with loads of > > > >children instead of with a few children is somehow child abuse. > > > > > > Some people are just plain nuts. Anyone who has read your posts over time > > > knows that you are a *very* intelligent woman, and well capable of home > > > schooling your children. > > > > > > I'm far too scatter-brained to attempt what you're doing. You have my > > > admiration and respect. > > > > > > Your detractor is an idiot. > > > > That's a sad comment, were you home schooled? Then you haven't a clue. > > Home schooling is an antiquated concept held by some obstinate > > agenda-driven simple minded who'd wish to return to the simpler times > > when there was nothing else... home schooling is a last resort, like > > canned chow mein and frozen pizza, immediate satisfaction but without > > depth or breadth. Home schooling is in modern times a devise of those > > who would shield their children from the real world... they are the > > idiots, the FEARFUL IDIOTS... scared to death that their children will > > discover how ignorant their parents truly are. A good parent wants > > their chidren to exceed them, not hold their children back. > > > > Sheldon > > > > All the more reason to home school....... ;-) > > TOO many kids are being graduated that still cannot read or compose a > decent sentence with a high school diploma. And still don't understand > how to work fractions. Shouldn't that be: Too many kids are graduating with a high school diploma who still cannot read or compose a decent sentence. Many still don't understand how to work fractions. So, we can add you to the total for "TOO"? Before complaining about anonymous children's inability to compose a decent sentence, you should spend a lot of quality time with Strunk and White. And read about sentence fractions. If you are an example of a home schooling parent, then I'm glad that my two kids attended school - public school at that! Susan B. > It's pretty sad that our public schools are getting so bad. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 19:06:09 -0700, Terry Pulliam Burd
> wrote: >On Wed, 15 Jun 2005 14:34:18 GMT, Tara > wrote: > >>The school I mentioned was also a backwoods Alabama school! What is >>it about backwoods Alabama? The schools aren't great, but the people >>are golden. > >Uh, anywhere near Double Springs? I'm not sure where Double Springs is located. We lived in Oneonta, about thirty miles north of Birmingham. Tara |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 09:42:36 -0500, in rec.food.cooking, Hairy wrote:
> >"--" > wrote in message ... >> >> "Hairy" > wrote in message >> ... >> > > > >> > > >But there's the pornography... >> > > >> > > Yes. There's that. Legal, heterosexual pornography with no children in >> it. >> > > No homosexuality. So maybe he's not asexual, but he certainly doesn't >> > > appear to be interested in homosexual porn. >> > > >> > >> > Really? What about the porn that was so bad that they weren't allowed to >> > view it in the courtroom? It involved nude teen and pre-teen boys in >> various >> > sexual poses. Those were sent to the jury room so that they could peruse >> > them in private. >> > H >> > >> >> BS "urban myth", or was that from the third stall down? >> > >No. It was from Court TV, and heavily covered. Where do you get your info? > >> If he really had had pictures of "teen and preteen boys in sexual poses", >> they would have brought charges for possession of child porn - and since >> that stuff is clearly and without a doubt child porn and not legal porn, >> those charges would have stuck. >> But there were no such pics. >> > >The jurors were asked if they viewed the child porn during deliberations and >they said some did, but since that wasn't one of the charges against him, >they didn't think that affected their verdict. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4376959.stm "All the material was heterosexual and there was no evidence it was directly related to the case, they argued. Judge Melville agreed." http://www.newcriminologist.co.uk/ne...?id=1015508367 "Retreating to the trenches under the onslaught, Jackson's attorney, Robert Sanger, fired back, telling the court that any material found was heterosexual and not illegal to have. Mr Sanger said that the material found on the computer was dated 1998, and from September 2003. As such it was not directly related to this case and the probative value was almost zero." Ah, I've found it, it's this. Court TV showed photos from these books during the trial. http://www.courttv.com/trials/jackson/042905_ctv.html "Two hardcover books "depicting images of adolescent boys in various stages of dress" were seized during a search of Jackson's Neverland Ranch in August 1993, according to detective Rosibel Smith. The bright, cheery cover of "Boys Will Be Boys," published in 1966, featured young blond boys in retro-style swim trunks doing cannonballs into a body of water. The second book, a hardcover titled "The Boy: A Photographic Essay," depicted preteen boys "in various poses, playing, swimming, jumping," Smith said." "defense attorney Robert Sanger asked Smith to read the inscriptions on both books. One appeared to have been written by Jackson. "Look at the true spirit of joy and happiness in these boy's faces," was penned on the inside page of "Boys Will Be Boys." "This is the spirit of boyhood, a life I never had and will always dream of. This is the life I want for my children. M.J." Jotted above the inscription in pencil were the words "OP," or out of print, "1988, very scarce MJ." The second book, presumably a gift from a fan, had a smattering of hearts scribbled around the inscription, which read: "To Michael, from your fan XXXOOO 'Rhonda.'" A note of "1983 Chicago" was inked at the bottom of the page Smith conceded that it was not illegal to own either book. " NOT child porn. -- Doug Weller -- exorcise the demon to reply Doug & Helen's Dogs http://www.dougandhelen.com A Director and Moderator of The Hall of Ma'at http://www.hallofmaat.com Doug's Archaeology Site: http://www.ramtops.co.uk |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >, Margaret Suran
> wrote: > > > > -Barb, preparing for tonight's shindig at The Governor's Residence. > > Woo-hoo! Picture of my basket is on my website in the Pickle Hat > > section. I've got bread dough raising now and will do the brownies in > > a > > couple hours. They'll be in the basket, too. As will a jar of > > yesterday's Apricot Jam with a label saying, "It's obscenely delicious > > -- the Vice Squad is on the way!" > > I found the letter and the invitation, but no picture of the basket. > What happened? (I was distracted. They're there now. -- -Barb, <http://www.jamlady.eboard.com> 6/6/05 Sam I Am! June 25, 1945: Me and Carly Simon. I wonder if she makes jam. (It's not too early to shop -- good chocolate and cheap gin. Or is it cheap chocolate and good gin? I never remember. No jam--coal to Newcastle and all that. "-) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
sf > wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:52:57 GMT, Dimitri wrote: > > > I think the school boards should be held criminally responsible for FRAUD! > > > > They're taking tax dollars and "graduating illiterate people" > > That's taking money under false pretenses. > > > Where is the responsibility of parent and child in your equation? You > make it sound like all a teacher has to do is open up a child's head > to pour in the information and if the information doesn't stick, it's > the school board's fault. When the mission statement for the math department (to give an example of a school in my area - and who knew that the math department needed a mission statement) doesn't even include instructing math or passing on knowledge of mathematics, but does include growing self esteem and building cultural diversity (I'm not being facetious), there is a problem with the teachers and administration. While self-esteem and cultural diversity can be wonderful things, they are not the primary goals of a math department, or shouldn't be anyway. And regardless, the illiteracy rate, coming out of the public school system no less, is a disgrace. What other first world country has a rate as low as ours? As America spends more on education our literacy rate goes down. In pilgrim times, when kids were hardly in school (compared to now) and were primarily homeschooled, there was not this level of illiteracy, not even close. Even in the dark ages, people were more literate than they are now. Now, whether that is a statement about group settings for learning, classroom size or teacher ability, or goals of the administration, I don't know. However, giving more money has not helped. > Glad you took responsibility for their education. Sorry you feel the > way you do about public education, but it's also obvious you didn't > even try it. If more people like you stayed, holding ALL parties > responsible, maybe public education wouldn't be in the mess you > perceive it to be in at this point. > > As people like you flee - only the worst of the worst remain. So, > public education becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. You can point > your finger and act holier than thou, but the fact remains that you > and your children weren't there holding up your end of the deal. You > opted out. You ran, leaving only those who are on the left side of > the Bell Curve to take the very tests you can now point to and claim > you made the correct decision. To private schools where the teachers make half as much, don't have as good benefits, the schools run on shoestring budgets (it is the rare private school that has enough money), yet turn out kids who are better equipped with the basics of learning and often do better on those standardized tests. Here is the other key, those private schools _want_ parental involvement and influence. Please note my choice of words, not just parental presence, affirmation or financial aid, but actual influence. Our school has no problem with me coming to observe the classroom, the public schools in our area forbid it. Not even if it is scheduled. Public schools do not want the parents to stay to help and change where change is needed, they want the parents to go along with whatever they are doing, whether it works or not. Regards, Ranee Remove do not & spam to e-mail me. "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
"pennyaline" <nsmitchell@spamspamspamspamspamspamspameggandspam .com> wrote: > Ranee Mueller wrote: > > Wow. Someone e-mailed me to tell me that there is no such thing as > > homeschooling and that failing to put my kids in preschool was the same > > as child abuse. > > Last I looked, preschool was still not required. In the near future, though, > I anticipate that all children will be required to attend federally-run > preschools in the interest of homeland security so that they may all be > turned into mealy mouthed little stormtroopers with "W"'s on their chests > whose only means of self-defense is to run behind the nearest flag (just > MHO, of course). When I was a kid, kindergarten wasn't required, I never went. I don't know if it is required now, or not, even if it isn't, it is assumed and your kid will be behind in first grade without it. As to your point about enforced early schooling, I wouldn't be as concerned about it from the right wing as the left, public schooling isn't exactly trying to indoctrinate kids into little conservatives. > > Even if I agreed with the first premise, which I don't, > > I just don't think I am up to doing all of the kids' schooling, I cannot > > fathom how missing out on sandboxes and fingerpaints with loads of > > children instead of with a few children is somehow child abuse. > > It isn't. It's a missed opportunity for socialization with loads of other > little sandthrowers and paintflingers from families with different > backgrounds and priorities, but it's not abuse. Right. And give them a greater chance to be mouthy, unruly, violent, be exposed to more disease (so much so that our pediatrician told me about a new vaccine for viral (?) meningitis, but then said, "Oh, your kids don't need it, they aren't in day care), respiratory illness/asthma, general sickness. Those things weren't worth it to us, when compared with the fact that our kids are better socialized than most, by nature of having multiple siblings at home with whom they play and share and learn, our extended church family which is made up of more than half children ages 1-16, our extreme distaste for regimenting children in their specific age group at all times for learning and playing, rather than having mixed ages, the fact that the ethnic background, financial status and racial mix in our own family is more diverse than the people around us in this entire town, our church is just about United Nations, the few neighbor kids are also available to play, our extended family has children. It's not like we lock them up and don't allow them to see anyone else, but I do notice that I don't have to worry about making sure they have play dates as much as the parents of only children I know or those who have kids spaced so far apart they have nothing in common with each other. The things the boys picked up in preschool in terms of learning, were nothing they couldn't (and didn't) get at home, the junk (calling people stupid, poopy heads, pushing, materialism, video game envy, disrespect for authority) wasn't part of our home life at all. I understand that some of these things creep in at any school, we just didn't think they were necessary for 3 and 4 year olds, and try to limit it as much as possible. > <this was not a political broadcast> Okay. Regards, Ranee Remove do not & spam to e-mail me. "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ranee Mueller" > wrote in message ... > In article >, > sf > wrote: > >> On Tue, 14 Jun 2005 17:52:57 GMT, Dimitri wrote: >> >> > I think the school boards should be held criminally responsible for >> > FRAUD! >> > >> > They're taking tax dollars and "graduating illiterate people" >> > That's taking money under false pretenses. >> > >> Where is the responsibility of parent and child in your equation? You >> make it sound like all a teacher has to do is open up a child's head >> to pour in the information and if the information doesn't stick, it's >> the school board's fault. > > When the mission statement for the math department (to give an > example of a school in my area - and who knew that the math department > needed a mission statement) doesn't even include instructing math or > passing on knowledge of mathematics, but does include growing self > esteem and building cultural diversity (I'm not being facetious), there > is a problem with the teachers and administration. While self-esteem > and cultural diversity can be wonderful things, they are not the primary > goals of a math department, or shouldn't be anyway. > > And regardless, the illiteracy rate, coming out of the public school > system no less, is a disgrace. What other first world country has a > rate as low as ours? As America spends more on education our literacy > rate goes down. In pilgrim times, when kids were hardly in school > (compared to now) and were primarily homeschooled, there was not this > level of illiteracy, not even close. Even in the dark ages, people were > more literate than they are now. Now, whether that is a statement about > group settings for learning, classroom size or teacher ability, or goals > of the administration, I don't know. However, giving more money has not > helped. > >> Glad you took responsibility for their education. Sorry you feel the >> way you do about public education, but it's also obvious you didn't >> even try it. If more people like you stayed, holding ALL parties >> responsible, maybe public education wouldn't be in the mess you >> perceive it to be in at this point. >> >> As people like you flee - only the worst of the worst remain. So, >> public education becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy. You can point >> your finger and act holier than thou, but the fact remains that you >> and your children weren't there holding up your end of the deal. You >> opted out. You ran, leaving only those who are on the left side of >> the Bell Curve to take the very tests you can now point to and claim >> you made the correct decision. > > To private schools where the teachers make half as much, don't have > as good benefits, the schools run on shoestring budgets (it is the rare > private school that has enough money), yet turn out kids who are better > equipped with the basics of learning and often do better on those > standardized tests. Here is the other key, those private schools _want_ > parental involvement and influence. Please note my choice of words, not > just parental presence, affirmation or financial aid, but actual > influence. Our school has no problem with me coming to observe the > classroom, the public schools in our area forbid it. Not even if it is > scheduled. Public schools do not want the parents to stay to help and > change where change is needed, they want the parents to go along with > whatever they are doing, whether it works or not. > > Regards, > Ranee And all this from someone who's parents couldn't spell "Renèe". |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
Damsel > wrote: > Some people are just plain nuts. Anyone who has read your posts over time > knows that you are a *very* intelligent woman, and well capable of home > schooling your children. Thank you. I am well able to teach them, and when we are in public and other people hear how I explain things or answer their questions, many people ask if I am homeschooling them, or say that I should. I am better on the direct question and answer or triggered by what we are seeing/watching/reading/visiting learning than on the structured, even the looser structure of homeschooling (less time on discipline with many fewer children, more one on one instruction, so fewer distractions, etc), learning that would be necessary for teaching them all through grade school. I do pretty well teaching a single subject in a classroom, and have done some guest teaching that way. Rich fills in quite a bit, we complement each other that way. He does field trips for the schools in our area, they visit the airport, he gives them a 30 minute or one hour class on aviation, and airports, and gives them a tour of the place and an airport. The kids leave knowing about elevators, lift, rudders, beacons, propellors, high wing and low wing aircraft, etc, and never to walk in front of an airplane.  > I'm far too scatter-brained to attempt what you're doing. You have my > admiration and respect. Your detractor is an idiot. And a coward. Unless Lucille Ball is being channelled through someone else. I could be wrong, but I believe it was a made up name, and it was someone else who posts here. Regards, Ranee Remove do not & spam to e-mail me. "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Melba's Jammin' wrote: > In article >, Margaret Suran > > wrote: > > >>>-Barb, preparing for tonight's shindig at The Governor's Residence. >>>Woo-hoo! Picture of my basket is on my website in the Pickle Hat >>>section. I've got bread dough raising now and will do the brownies in >>>a >>>couple hours. They'll be in the basket, too. As will a jar of >>>yesterday's Apricot Jam with a label saying, "It's obscenely delicious >>>-- the Vice Squad is on the way!" >> >>I found the letter and the invitation, but no picture of the basket. >>What happened? (> > > I was distracted. They're there now. What a lovely selection of jams and other goodies. Now come the questions: What will you wear? Will Rob take pictures of you? When will you add them to your web site? I can barely wait. I know that your will wow them all. Will the governor's wife ever be the same again? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Clamdigger" > wrote in message k.net... > And all this from someone who's parents couldn't spell "Renèe". I can't believe anyone could be as stupid as you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article . net>,
"MarjorieB" > wrote: > Though I don't believe public schools are the greatest, they're certainly > better than no school at all, which is what "The Homeschooled" are getting. > And though I have a college degree, it isn't in elementary education, so I > am therefore no more capable of educating my children than is a bored > housewife, which is what "The Homeschooling" are. Then why is it that when children were largely homeschooled in our country (at least for their early education, through what would now be second or third grade), by mothers harried by real hard work at home, and who weren't educated beyond maybe the age of 14 or 15, the children accomplished so much? I am not planning on homeschooling my kids, but parents with a vested interest in their own children have more drive to teach them, to work with their learning styles. I learned this forcefully when Alexander was bringing home blank papers from his preschool and his teacher was asking me about any learning problems. I sat down with him and asked why he didn't do the paper, whether anyone told him how. He answered that they had told him what to do. I asked if he understood, he said yes, but he didn't know how to do it. I showed him once, and he was able to do all the rest easily and quickly. Nobody had shown him how to do what they were asking. This was when he was 4. They had a room full of kids, and it was easier to just say that the kid wasn't doing his work than to sit with him for the three minutes it took for me to ask him what he needed and show him how to do it. There may be subjects that a parent does not know how to cover with his/her children, but certainly reading, writing, math, history, basics can be covered quite easily at home, and with the material available to homeschoolers now, and the co-ops of parents who will teach science, for instance, to a larger group of homeschooled children, or art, or music, these children are well able to have a balanced education. I am currently giving violin lessons to a bright, accomplished young woman who is homeschooled, and who will be heading to college at 17, passing the tests with flying colors and well socialized. As one of those housewives you mentioned, though I prefer the term homemaker, I will attest that I am neither bored nor incapable, and most of the women I know who stay home (a laughable term, since I am in my car and out of the home so often) are in the same position. You do not need a degree in elementary education to teach your children to share, cooperate, have good manners, read, write, do math (we're already doing the beginnings of algebra with our eldest son, though he doesn't really know it, and we've been teaching him about how it was his ancestors that came up with these concepts), study history in elementary school, any more than you need a degree in child psychology to be a parent. Regards, Ranee Remove do not & spam to e-mail me. "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article t>,
"Clamdigger" > wrote: > And all this from someone who's parents couldn't spell "Renèe". You're right. My parents were immigrants, who spoke English as a second language, French wasn't one of their languages. They liked the name, and misspelled it. So did you, though, it is properly Renée. I took French for six years, and did honors work in it, though I am rusty now. None of this, however, has any bearing on the state of public/private/home education, it merely shows you to be a horse's ass who can only make personal attacks. Regards, Ranee Remove do not & spam to e-mail me. "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ranee Mueller wrote:
> And regardless, the illiteracy rate, coming out of the public school > system no less, is a disgrace. What other first world country has a > rate as low as ours? As America spends more on education our literacy > rate goes down. In pilgrim times, when kids were hardly in school > (compared to now) and were primarily homeschooled, there was not this > level of illiteracy, not even close. Even in the dark ages, people were > more literate than they are now. Wow. It scares me that people like you are home schooling and then make a statement about higher literacy rates being higher during the Dark Ages than they are now in schools now. I hate to imagine what you are teaching your kids. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
Dave Smith > wrote: > Ranee Mueller wrote: > > > And regardless, the illiteracy rate, coming out of the public > > school > > system no less, is a disgrace. What other first world country has > > a rate as low as ours? As America spends more on education our > > literacy rate goes down. In pilgrim times, when kids were hardly > > in school (compared to now) and were primarily homeschooled, there > > was not this level of illiteracy, not even close. Even in the dark > > ages, people were more literate than they are now. > > Wow. It scares me that people like you are home schooling and then > make a statement about higher literacy rates being higher during the > Dark Ages than they are now in schools now. I hate to imagine what > you are teaching your kids. You must be easily frightened. I left out a word in that sentence: educated. It is a first, as far as I know it, in history that education is creating people who cannot read. Regards, Ranee Remove do not & spam to e-mail me. "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu 16 Jun 2005 12:26:17p, Melba's Jammin' wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> In article >, Margaret Suran > > wrote: > >> > >> > -Barb, preparing for tonight's shindig at The Governor's Residence. >> > Woo-hoo! Picture of my basket is on my website in the Pickle Hat >> > section. I've got bread dough raising now and will do the brownies in >> > a couple hours. They'll be in the basket, too. As will a jar of >> > yesterday's Apricot Jam with a label saying, "It's obscenely delicious >> > -- the Vice Squad is on the way!" >> >> I found the letter and the invitation, but no picture of the basket. >> What happened? (> > I was distracted. They're there now. What an absolutely lovely gift! I'm sure that anything the other ladies may bring will pale in comparison. What a lucky First Lady! -- Wayne Boatwright *¿* ____________________________________________ Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day. Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Margaret Suran wrote:
> >> >> -Barb, preparing for tonight's shindig at The Governor's Residence. >> Woo-hoo! Picture of my basket is on my website in the Pickle Hat >> section. I've got bread dough raising now and will do the brownies in >> a couple hours. They'll be in the basket, too. As will a jar of >> yesterday's Apricot Jam with a label saying, "It's obscenely delicious >> -- the Vice Squad is on the way!" > > > I found the letter and the invitation, but no picture of the basket. > What happened? (I found it under the "pickle hats" section. Looks GREAT!!! Goomba |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ranee Mueller wrote:
> I left out a word in that sentence: > educated. So it should read "Even in the dark ages, educated people were more literate than they are now"? > It is a first, as far as I know it, in history that education > is creating people who cannot read. I think that's a tautology, though. In the olden days, an educated person was someone who was literate. So by definition, 100% of educated people were literate by the standards of their time. But educational opportunity wasn't offered to everyone; the people who were offered educations were the most likely to have the ability to learn, and they were kicked out of school if they demonstrated an inability or unwillingness. Plus the standard for literacy was extremely low. Someone who could sign their own name and/or read a Bible verse with some semblance of accuracy was considered literate. In the US today, ~99% of all people are literate, defined as "you can read and write well enough to function in society," which IMHO is a much higher standard. Personally, I think any situation where children get extended one-on-one contact with teacher is better than the public school experience most kids get. And I think that it's great that you're willing and able to homeschool your kids. But for kids with less interested parents, public schools are better than the alternative of no school at all. Phoebe |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >,
Phoebe & Allyson > wrote: > Ranee Mueller wrote: > > > I left out a word in that sentence: > > educated. > > So it should read "Even in the dark ages, educated people were more > literate than they are now"? Yes, for all intents and purposes. > > It is a first, as far as I know it, in history that education > > is creating people who cannot read. > > I think that's a tautology, though. In the olden days, an educated > person was someone who was literate. So by definition, 100% of educated > people were literate by the standards of their time. But educational > opportunity wasn't offered to everyone; the people who were offered > educations were the most likely to have the ability to learn, and they > were kicked out of school if they demonstrated an inability or > unwillingness. Plus the standard for literacy was extremely low. > Someone who could sign their own name and/or read a Bible verse with > some semblance of accuracy was considered literate. This was not the standard for those who finished their education, though. What bothers me about the illiteracy being ignored in public schools is that they are turning out illiterate students at the end of the educational process. The illiteracy rate in America is somewhere around 3% of adults. We have pretty much mandatory education of children here, 3% is an awful lot of adults who were passed on without being taught. > In the US today, ~99% of all people are literate, defined as "you can > read and write well enough to function in society," which IMHO is a much > higher standard. I understood it to be closer to 97%, but even so, that is a large number of people who cannot function. > Personally, I think any situation where children get extended one-on-one > contact with teacher is better than the public school experience most > kids get. And I think that it's great that you're willing and able to > homeschool your kids. But for kids with less interested parents, public > schools are better than the alternative of no school at all. Absolutely, I hope I did not give the impression that I thought there was no use for public education, I just don't think we are getting what we pay for out of that system. As it is a system designed for all the people, and paid for by all the people, I think it should frankly be held to a higher standard. Our eldest son's private school takes in about a third of the money per student that the public school does, the teachers make about half what the teachers in our public schools do, their benefits aren't as good. Ours is not an elite prep school, they pretty much accept anyone who applies, and pays their bill. It is a small school, and they run on very little. Yet, our son performed at a first and second grade level in kindergarten. Which is not to say that there would be anything wromg with him performing at a kindergarten level or even below, if he were really making an effort. I just always wonder at the people who accept so little for so much money in public schooling. Regards, Ranee Remove do not & spam to e-mail me. "She seeks wool and flax, and works with willing hands." Prov 31:13 http://arabianknits.blogspot.com/ http://talesfromthekitchen.blogspot.com/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Ophelia" > said:
>"Clamdigger" > wrote in message nk.net... > >> And all this from someone who's parents couldn't spell "Renèe". > >I can't believe anyone could be as stupid as you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I *wuv* you, Ophelia. <EG> Carol -- CLICK DAILY TO FEED THE HUNGRY United States: http://www.stopthehunger.com/ International: http://www.thehungersite.com/ |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ranee Mueller wrote:
> "pennyaline" wrote: > > Last I looked, preschool was still not required. In the near future, though, > > I anticipate that all children will be required to attend federally-run > > preschools in the interest of homeland security so that they may all be > > turned into mealy mouthed little stormtroopers with "W"'s on their chests > > whose only means of self-defense is to run behind the nearest flag (just > > MHO, of course). > > When I was a kid, kindergarten wasn't required, I never went. I > don't know if it is required now, or not, even if it isn't, it is > assumed and your kid will be behind in first grade without it. > > As to your point about enforced early schooling, I wouldn't be as > concerned about it from the right wing as the left, public schooling > isn't exactly trying to indoctrinate kids into little conservatives. I had meant that to be a joke, but after reading your reply I gave it some more thought and I'm now convinced that, yes damn it!! That's exactly what public education is doing, and always has done. > > > Even if I agreed with the first premise, which I don't, > > > I just don't think I am up to doing all of the kids' schooling, I cannot > > > fathom how missing out on sandboxes and fingerpaints with loads of > > > children instead of with a few children is somehow child abuse. > > > > It isn't. It's a missed opportunity for socialization with loads of other > > little sandthrowers and paintflingers from families with different > > backgrounds and priorities, but it's not abuse. > > Right. And give them a greater chance to be mouthy, unruly, violent, That depends largely on the child. Some things are "nature," you realize. > be exposed to more disease (so much so that our pediatrician told me > about a new vaccine for viral (?) meningitis, but then said, "Oh, your > kids don't need it, they aren't in day care), Won't need it because they aren't in daycare?? Your pediatrician is a dimwit! > respiratory > illness/asthma, general sickness. Do you keep your children in plastic bubbles? Incidentally, do you know that asthma is an autoimmune disease? If they're gonna get it, they're gonna get it. > Those things weren't worth it to us, > when compared with the fact that our kids are better socialized than > most, by nature of having multiple siblings at home with whom they play > and share and learn, our extended church family which is made up of more > than half children ages 1-16, our extreme distaste for regimenting > children in their specific age group at all times for learning and > playing, rather than having mixed ages, the fact that the ethnic > background, financial status and racial mix in our own family is more > diverse than the people around us in this entire town, our church is > just about United Nations, the few neighbor kids are also available to > play, our extended family has children. Uhhhhh... So, things are STILL limited to the family unit, right? I may be the only one who feels this way, but as I see it your adamant defense as stated above indicates some real intolerance and lack of desire to extend beyond yourselves. > It's not like we lock them up > and don't allow them to see anyone else, but I do notice that I don't > have to worry about making sure they have play dates as much as the > parents of only children I know or those who have kids spaced so far > apart they have nothing in common with each other. And that relates to home schooling how? > The things the boys picked up in preschool in terms of learning, were > nothing they couldn't (and didn't) get at home, the junk (calling people > stupid, poopy heads, pushing, materialism, video game envy, disrespect > for authority) wasn't part of our home life at all. I understand that > some of these things creep in at any school, we just didn't think they > were necessary for 3 and 4 year olds, and try to limit it as much as > possible. These things creep in when your kids simply step out of the house to play. Three and four year olds are especially susceptible. |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ranee Mueller wrote: > > "Clamdigger" wrote: > > > And all this from someone who's parents couldn't spell "Ren=E8e". > > You're right. My parents were immigrants, who spoke English as a > second language, French wasn't one of their languages. They liked the > name, and misspelled it. So did you, though, it is properly Ren=E9e. You're both incorrect. Ones proper name can't be mispelled, however one designates their name is to be spelled is the correct spelling. Your parents did not misspell your name, that is the name they gave you. And transliterated variants are never misspellings. In the context of written English "Ranee" is how your name is correctly written, with no markings. When written in the context of some other language you may include the appropriate markings for that language. How you choose your name to be pronounced is entirely up to you. But inserting embellishments innapropriately is indicative of the height of haughtiness (disdainfully proud, ie. full of oneself). And from reading your posts it's obvious to me that English is not your primary language either. Your English contains an accented syntax shaded by some other language(s). Check your over-use of commas, sentence fragments, and especially run-ons, dead giveaways indicating English is not the language in which one regularly converses. In your short paragraph above you inserted no less than three (3) superfluous commas. Your sentence construction is absolutely atrocious. You should not be teaching children English, you are not qualified, not even close. That you are using a spell checker program is blatantly obvious, one can only imagine how your posts would appear otherwise. I'm confident that on the occasions you speak English at home it is broken English and with an accent. But I do compliment you in that you are able to converse in multiple languages, that is a talent. My father possesed that talent, he conversed fluently in Russian, Swedish, Norwegian, German, French, Yiddish, Hebrew, and others. Yes, he spoke English well too but it was not the language he was most comfortable with. My father was a gifted multilingual and was also a very gifted musician, he could play many instruments well, he was able to read and write music better than he could any language, was very good with arithmetic and had a photographic memory with numbers. You'd never know his formal education stopped at 3rd grade. But he was the life of the party and especially at his senior center, he entertained, helped with language barriers, ran the kitchen, and the women loved him... figuratively and literally. My father taught his children many things but most importantly he insisted they receive a proper education, not "oifn pripitchok". Perhaps you should put that language talent of yours to good use, volunteer to tutor at your local "English as a Second Language" program, inquire at your local library and public school. Not putting ones talents to good use is like they don't exist. Every parent should do all they can to extend the scope of their children's education at home but you are definitely not qualified to be their sole source, no individual is, or I should say such a person is extremely rare. You are not rare, you are common... you pat yourself on the back too much to be anything other... self praise is no recommendation... braggadocio is not synonymous with self esteem, in fact exactly the opposite. You invoke your husband's name way too much for you to be anything on your own. M-W in=B7voke Date: 15th century 1 a : to petition for help or support b : to appeal to or cite as authority=20 Sheldon |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 14:25:48 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> Mea culpa. I was distracted by something and have only just now posted > it. Sorry. I forgive you. > It's on the PickleHat tab. (That's our state capitol in > the background of the label.) LOLOLOL! Do you spend sleepless nights thinking up these things: "Goobernatorial©™" Grape Jelly - what's a PB&J sandwich without it?" Is word play still alive and well in Minnesota/the Midwest or are you the last player? If it comes effortlessly, you've missed your calling, that's for sure. Hope everything went well at the Goobernatorial dinner - no toilet paper on your shoe or other embarrassing incidents.  |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
In article >, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote: > On Thu 16 Jun 2005 12:26:17p, Melba's Jammin' wrote in rec.food.cooking: > > > In article >, Margaret Suran > > > wrote: > > > >> > > >> > -Barb, preparing for tonight's shindig at The Governor's Residence. > >> > Woo-hoo! Picture of my basket is on my website in the Pickle Hat > >> > section. I've got bread dough raising now and will do the brownies > >> > in > >> > a couple hours. They'll be in the basket, too. As will a jar of > >> > yesterday's Apricot Jam with a label saying, "It's obscenely > >> > delicious > >> > -- the Vice Squad is on the way!" > >> > >> I found the letter and the invitation, but no picture of the basket. > >> What happened? (> > > > I was distracted. They're there now. > > What an absolutely lovely gift! I'm sure that anything the other ladies > may bring will pale in comparison. What a lucky First Lady! AFAIK, mine was the only gift. (*^;^*) How do YOU spell suck-up? B A R B S C H A L L E R. I'm shameless and transparent. -- -Barb, <http://www.jamlady.eboard.com> 6/6/05 Sam I Am! June 25, 1945: Me and Carly Simon. I wonder if she makes jam. (It's not too early to shop -- good chocolate and cheap gin. Or is it cheap chocolate and good gin? I never remember. No jam--coal to Newcastle and all that. "-) |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:10:39 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> A VERY fine evening!! A perfect evening out of doors. More later. My > First Lady is one classy woman. Great! You have a way with words and a gift for gab, so I'm sure you were the life of the party - we're proud of you, lady. > (I only got ice cream on my chest once.) I hope the smudge matched your gown.Hey, I wanted to ask you this morning about what you packed your wares in. The basket looked very nice, but my attention was drawn to the basket liner. It had a bandana print, but looked like tissue paper. What was it? |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu 16 Jun 2005 09:11:52p, Melba's Jammin' wrote in rec.food.cooking:
> In article >, Wayne Boatwright > > wrote: > >> On Thu 16 Jun 2005 12:26:17p, Melba's Jammin' wrote in >> rec.food.cooking: >> >> > In article >, Margaret Suran >> > > wrote: >> > >> >> > >> >> > -Barb, preparing for tonight's shindig at The Governor's >> >> > Residence. Woo-hoo! Picture of my basket is on my website in the >> >> > Pickle Hat section. I've got bread dough raising now and will do >> >> > the brownies in a couple hours. They'll be in the basket, too. >> >> > As will a jar of yesterday's Apricot Jam with a label saying, >> >> > "It's obscenely delicious -- the Vice Squad is on the way!" >> >> >> >> I found the letter and the invitation, but no picture of the basket. >> >> What happened? (>> > >> > I was distracted. They're there now. >> >> What an absolutely lovely gift! I'm sure that anything the other >> ladies may bring will pale in comparison. What a lucky First Lady! > > AFAIK, mine was the only gift. (*^;^*) How do YOU spell suck-up? B A > R B S C H A L L E R. I'm shameless and transparent. LOL! And very special! -- Wayne Boatwright *¿* ____________________________________________ Give me a smart idiot over a stupid genius any day. Sam Goldwyn, 1882-1974 |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:11:52 -0500, Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> > AFAIK, mine was the only gift. (*^;^*) How do YOU spell suck-up? B A > R B S C H A L L E R. I'm shameless and transparent. Absolutely not! Your mother taught you well... you brought a "hostess gift". |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Damsel" > wrote in message ... > "Ophelia" > said: > >>"Clamdigger" > wrote in message ink.net... >> >>> And all this from someone who's parents couldn't spell "Renèe". >> >>I can't believe anyone could be as stupid as you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! > > I *wuv* you, Ophelia. <EG> <G> |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message ... > On Mon 13 Jun 2005 09:07:22p, Nexis wrote in rec.food.cooking: > >> >> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message >> ... >>> notbob wrote: >>> >>>> On 2005-06-13, BeautyBuyNature.com > wrote: >>>> >>>> > NOT GUILTY >>>> >>>> Oh swell! More reinforcement for Michael to continue his perverted >>>> antics. That jury ...or perhaps the judge... should be put up on >>>> charges. >>>> >>> >>> That does it. If I ever get the urge to go out and kill some one or >>> have sleepovers with little boys, I am going to go to California, the >>> place where you can get away with murder if you have enough money. >>> >>> >> >> I don't know about Michael or OJ....but apparently it is perfectly okay >> to run someone over with your car in our lovely sunshine-filled state. >> >> My husband was hit by a car almost 2 weeks ago. It was deliberate. My >> daughter and his brother witnessed it. The police came, handcuffed the >> guy, stayed until an ambulance took my husband to the hospital, then >> uncuffed and released the guy. When my BIL asked why, the cop replied >> "It wasn't like he did it on purpose". >> Oddly enough, I was at the Farmer's Market in Hillcrest ( I bought some >> luscious raspberries, does that count as OBFood??), and overheard >> another couple recounting a similar experience...although the person hit >> in that case was on a bike, not on foot. >> >> kimberly > > How is your husband doing, kimberly? Was the person who hit him someone > known to your family, or just a random act of intentional violence? I > can't believe the police simply let the guy go. Was he not charged with > hit and run? > > I hope you husband is doind well. > > -- > Wayne Boatwright Õ¿Õ¬ Wayne, He's doing much better. There was some muscle damage (tears and separation) but no broken bones. He's had alot of headaches too, but not as bad the last few days. The person who hit him wasn't someone he knew, but he'd met him. It's a long story, but apparently the officer on the scene knew the guy, and so took him at his word. Personally, I'm not a litigious person, but I plan to sue the pants off this guy. kimberly |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"notbob" > wrote in message ... > On 2005-06-14, Nexis > wrote: > >> any better than the rest of us in the general public if he is guilty of >> anything more than a disconnection from reality. > > If you truly believe that, I think you are suffering from a > disconnection from reality. > > nb First of all, I said that I don't know if he is guilty of more than that...and more to the point, neither do you. You're making an assumption of guilt, but the fact is it is nothing more than an assumption/opinion. You simply do not know. The REALITY is just that: I don't know. You don't know. The only ones who truly know are him and the accuser. kimberly |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"notbob" > wrote in message ... > On 2005-06-14, Wayne Boatwright > wrote: > >> Obviously, you must have been there. Maybe in his bed, too. >> > > One need not be there to realize this is one sick puppy. He openly > admits his preference for bedding kids. Also, your childish comment > was uncalled for. > > nb He did not say he had a preference for bedding kids. He said that he let them sleep in his bed. Your inference and refusal to admit you simply do not know the truth of it are childish, as was your accusation that I am disconnected from reality because I can admit that I don't know if he is guilty or not. You don't know all the facts, and you have no real idea of what happened. Your making assumptions based on your own beliefs, and that is far from stating facts. Sick he may be, but that doesn't necessarily mean he's a child molester. kimberly |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Peter Aitken" > wrote in message ... > "Nexis" > wrote in message > news:YJqre.117$X71.61@fed1read07... >> >> "Peter Aitken" > wrote in message >> ... >>> "BeautyBuyNature.com" > wrote in message >>> oups.com... >>>> NOT GUILTY >>>> >>> He may not be guilty of child molestation, but he is most certainly >>> guilty of being a no talent, nose-jobbed, bleached jackass. It is a >>> total mystery how anyone can find him appealing. His performances are >>> almost the definition of bad. >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Peter Aitken >> >> I'm not a fan of his, but there are millions of people around the world >> who find him to be very talented. I think he has BDD, and needs serious >> therapy, but attacking him through his music is just silly. It may not be >> your cup of tea, but that hardly makes him a "no-talent" performer. >> > > Yes, and lots of people eat at McDonalds but that does not make it good > food. Lots of people read romance novels but that does not make them good > writing. Lots of people watch soap operas but that does not make them good > drama. Need I continue? > > -- > Peter Aitken Hardly the same thing. Your opinion of what makes good music does not define what good music is. Need I say more? kimberly > > |
|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| *--> Michael Jackson <--* | General Cooking | |||
| Michael Jackson | General Cooking | |||
| Michael Jackson | General Cooking | |||
| MICHAEL JACKSON | General Cooking | |||
| Michael Jackson's nose | General Cooking | |||
Linear Mode
