---2/28/08----(Ignore date above; I've drastically changed post)
My brother is out of the hospital and doing much better, although it'll be a while till he's completely back to normal. He's started classes and seems to be doing pretty good, which is great. I'm just worried now that he'll push himself too hard and wear himself down or relapse. He hasn't started working again yet and won't for a few more days, but we're hoping that he can change jobs or do less physically draining work on his current job.
=) Thanks! I knew this week was going to get better and it sho' 'nuff did. I hope your parents' anniversary dinner went well and I hope my thing came in the mail safely.
oh dear. I can totally understand where he is coming from. Last year I got tonsilitis really badly, the nurse didn't know how I was breathing (because aparently, there wasn't a visible hole in my throat for the air to pass through), and it was non-too pleasant. However, I didn't run a fever nearly that high. I hope that he doesn't have to get a tonsilectomy, because that is one tough surgery to recover from (I had mine over christmas, which wasn't preferable at all).
I've heard of mono cases that took up to a year to fully recover from...not to discourage you, but to help you understand that it may take a long while before he is completely normal again
oh, and Classroom Management didn't really tell me anything more that I didn't already know. For a lot of the reasons that he stated in class were already reasons why I wanted to teach the younger ages. However, we've only had one class period so far, so who knows where he will take my immagination and inspiration?
no problem! I don't get to show the dress off very often. :) And I'm glad you like Critter Castaways! I had never seen the show before I started working it, but I love it. You should definitely come see it next time you're at Busch Gardens...maybe I'll be working that day. :)
Hey Alice, good to hear that your brother is doing well. I hope that you and paul are doing well. Well come to my account sometime.(reminder, i am Jeff, Pauls little bro).
Certainly, Eric and I neither are saying emotion is bad at all...emotionalism is where you do things considered spiritual for that emotional appeal and that feeling you get. I think you probably understand the difference though. Good comment.
yeah, usually you would have to take general psych first, but because I/O is an every other spring course, that we HAVE to have to graduate, Mr. Yoho is waving the general psych requirement for me, and I guess whoever else is in the same spot as I am...since we fulfilled our behavioral science credits, just not with psych...
Sounds like you are on the ball, six months before the wedding is about when Larry and I got our registry stuff done too, you're not behind, don't even worry about that, I always think that way myself, but realize that I have more done than I should have by this time and that there are somethings that you can't do until a couple of months before the wedding.
I'm registered at Target, Bed Bath & Beyond and JCPenneys
Guys, please pray for my brother. I am so worried about him right now. He's been sick for the past 2 weeks, and has had to miss school and work. It started out as stomach flu, then he got strep throat (doctor said it was the worst he'd seen in 2 or 3 years), and now they're saying he has severe inflammation and tonsilitis. He may have to go to the hospital.
--------Update-------
This morning they had to take him to the hospital. His temperature was at 103 and his throat was so swollen he had just a slit open to breathe through. They're giving him a strong antibiotic, painkiller, and steroid. He'll probably have to stay 2 or 3 days.
-------------Update-----------------------
In spite of all the medication, he was still in a lot of pain the last time I talked to my parents. His throat has stayed pretty swollen, with very small space to breathe through. His temperature is still pretty high. They are now saying they may have to operate on his tonsils (but not for sure). They're also running a lot of tests, but the results haven't come back yet.
---------Update-----------------
Apparently my brother has mono, and a very severe case of it. I can't fathom this; he's one of the most healthy, energetic people I know. They're keeping him at the hospital until Sunday. However, the good news is that he's starting to feel a lot better and eat more solid foods.
I know a severe case of mono can keep a person down for a couple of weeks or more. Please pray that he can recover as quickly as possible. he's already missed some school, and will miss probably a week more while recovering and could have a hard time catching back up in all of his college classes.
Also please pray that Melissa or anybody in my family hasn't caught the mono. Mono has a long incubation period, and its possible that it could have been passed along, long before he knew he had it.
Major thanks to those of you who have told me on here or in person that you are praying for him.
Oh you know I am. Well, he's only missed a week of school, but still, that ain't good. They switched his meds and he said they actually did something for him, but it didn't last too long. Lord willing, he won't have to go to the hospital. Do you understand how badly I want to be up there NOW. *sigh* This stinks. Really. Truely.
Alice, thank you for the comment on my blog. I am thinking about and praying for your brother! May all our requests please the Lord so that He will make everything well again soon!
That's exactly how mine started - fever like the flu, a couple of bouts of strep throat, then, after a third doctor visit, a diagnosis of mono. Fun stuff - especially in the middle of the semester. Will be praying for him - rest will bring recovery :)
Daniel said that the doctor's note said he can go back to school and work on the 25th. He might wait to go back to work just yet, but he is looking forward to going to school tomorrow.
I just got off of the phone with Daniel and he said that the doctors did tell him to go ahead and wait another week for work. Yesterday was the other way around, my bad. :)
Please read this, especially if you plan to vote tomorrow.
I know so many people who think Ron Paul has the best ideas for fixing the economy and taking care of our spending/debt problem. But they won't vote for him because they think he's crazy for his foreign policy ideas. People, we have to realize that our foreign policy and economy are directly related to each other.
Our foreign policy is one of the biggest reasons, if not THE biggest, we are going broke. If we don't pull out voluntarily now, we will be forced to pull out later when our country is in a depression and our dollar is worth almost nothing. The only reason we're even able to pay for this war is because we're borrowing billions of dollars from China and other foreign countries. If you really don't think things are that bad, please do some research. If you're too lazy to do research, watch this video. It features Ron Paul in it, but features many other experts discussing the economy as well, and gives a pretty thorough picture of where our economy stands right now. It is also one of the most powerful videos I've ever watched.
“We face a coming financial crisis. Our current account deficit is more than $600 billion annually. Our foreign debt is more than $3 trillion. Foreigners now own over $1.4 trillion of our Treasury and mortgage debt…We must borrow $3 billion from foreigners every business day to maintain our extravagant spending. Our national debt now is increasing $600 billion per year, and guess what, we print over $600 billion per year to keep the charade going. But there is a limit and I’m fearful we’re fast approaching it.” –Congressman Ron Paul, M.D., September 17, 2005
"The greatest threat facing America today is not terrorism, or foreign economic competition, or illegal immigration. The greatest threat facing America today is the disastrous fiscal policies of our own government, marked by shameless deficit spending and Federal Reserve currency devaluation. It is this one-two punch – Congress spending more than it can tax or borrow, and the Fed printing money to make up the difference – that threatens to impoverish us by further destroying the value of our dollars."-- Ron Paul
Romney, McCain, and Huckabee can talk all they want about helping the economy and cutting spending, but if you look at what they want to do, they would only be increasing our federal spending and making our problems worse.
Leave comments below the last post.
Who I Am and Am Not Voting For and Why; And Thoughts About Voting in General
1.He would make the federal government bigger than it already is. Making more federal laws and more government programs to “fix” things is not what we need.
2.He uses his Christian background and beliefs to pander for votes, and its that instead of the real issues that often motivates people to vote for him. I’m sorry, but being religious does not automatically make you a good president. And I’m tired of hearing Christians say they’ll vote for him as soon as they hear him invoke the name of Jesus, even though there are a lot of things that he's said and done in this campaign and as governor that would show he's just another dishonest politician.
3.He is not fiscally conservative.
4.Too much of what he says is just smooth-talking emotional rhetoric.
5.He is a member of the CFR and one of his top advisors is a leading member of that organization. (http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=59622)
Why I’m NOT voting for Romney:
1.He is nothing but another smooth-talking politician who is trying to get your votes. This is the man who is known for changing his stances on multiple things; we can give him the benefit of the doubt and say that he genuinely changed his mind, but chances are that he didn’t.
2.While I think he would be more responsible fiscally than a lot of the other candidates, he still isn’t talking about making as drastic of spending cuts as what need to be made and he still wants to spend federal money on things that he shouldn’t (like in Michigan promising billions of dollars to the automobile industry).
3.He supported the invasion of Iraq, and still supports what’s going on there.
4.I prefer somebody who has come from a more “Average American” background, and understands better the struggles of the middle class and will work for them. I’m not gonna assume that Romney is ignorant and uncaring of the middle class, but he grew up in a prominent, well-to-do family and he is a wealthy, corporation-tied business man through and through, and he has many lobbyists playing major roles in campaign.
(However, as much as I dislike him, he is probably the only other Republican besides the one below that I would even consider voting for).
McCAIN: I'm not going to bother with ripping him apart because most of the people I know on here don't like him anyway and already know why he'd make a bad president.
Why I AM Voting for Dr. Ron Paul
1.He has this crazy idea that we shouldn’t spend more than what we have, and that we should work on paying off our trillions of debt. You can’t just keep raising taxes and printing off more green paper to pay for things.
2.He believes in the state/local governments and parents getting back the control over public education and is extremely supportive of home-schooling.
3.He believes that pre-emptive war is immoral, and that we should only go to war with those who are a direct, obvious threat to our country. He has this crazy belief in following something called the "Golden Rule" in everything, and that would include foreign policy. He sees the stupidity in trying to police the world, funding totalatarian governments with taxpayer money to “protect our interests”, borrowing billions of dollars from communist China to fund our “spreading of democracy”, and getting into military conflicts to protect our oil interests. He also realizes that our foreign policy is directly tied to our current economic woes and the fact that half the world is sick of us (including people who have been our allies). We make think we're making ourselves safer by doing all these things overseas but all we're doing is weakening ourselves financially, to the point where we'll destroy our country without the help of terrorists.
4.He doesn't act like a politician; he’s not out to pander for or demand your vote. He is honest and straightforward; he doesn't beat around the bush and just tell you want you want to hear. He has a strong family, and they are very supportive of him. He has demonstrated integrity and strong family values in his personal life.
5.He believes in following our nation’s laws (ex. Constitution) and changing them if need be through legal processes, instead of ignoring or twisting them. If our government can twist the Constitution to mean whatever they want it to, then they can do whatever they want to, despite what we want.
(P.S. I also agree with his stances on the welfare programs, illegal immigration, and abortion, but time just doesn't permit me to go into everything).
Read the candidate's writings on different subjects, and not just what they say in brief interviews and 30 second debate arguments. And research the issues themselves to form your own educated opinions. If you do this, and disagree with me on who you pick, that's cool. I will respect your opinion. Just please don't make an uneducated vote.
Thanks for the clarification. I maybe phrased the bit about using our - currently overseas - troops to secure our borders badly, but it seemed like that would be a likely conclusion from reading some of the points on his "issues" page.
My issue is this: If I am not happy with the Republican nomination and I choose to vote independant then I am securing the democrats office as well as helping the democrats put additional liberal judges on the supreme court which will negatively affect this country for 30+ years.
The reason we get sorry candidates and politicians who flip flop and pander to the public is because we refuse to stand on principle and instead waste a vote on evil men who are virtually picked by the media, with the rationale that voting for an evil is justified if it helps the other party's evil lose.
We ask for them and we get them. We will keep getting them as our nominees unless we tell the GOP that we've had enough of this.
Your vote is your message to the government telling them what you want. For instance, whether a person votes for Hillary or McCain, either way they are telling the government, "I want more war and I want more taxes."
Okay. As long as you are happy with supreme court judges who will continue to uphold abortion rights and other liberal ideologies. What do you base your comment that John McCain is evil on? What makes Mitt Romney evil? Presidentially speaking? Your comment of "I want more war, I want more taxes" is silly too. John McCain doesn't believe in more war, he just wants the wars that we end up in to be successful, unlike Ron Paul. He wants our mission in Iraq to fail. That really makes him a great contender for Commander in Chief... or maybe he forgot that that is a title also.
I want supreme court judges who realize that a lot of what they judge on should be left up to the states in the first place, but we don't, which is why we have Roe vs. Wade. And quite frankly, I don't trust the other Republican candidates to put good judges in either.
When I talked about voting for "evil", I was simply referencing people's desire to "vote for the lesser of two evils". However, I do believe that doing harm to or killing innocent people, stealing, breaking the law (like the Constitution), lying, etc. are evil and a politician who has consistently done or encouraged 2 or more of those actions shouldn't even be considered for President.
I think John McCain would have our troops in Iran and Pakistan within a year of becoming president, but that's just my opinion. A lot of people think that based on his previous record and stances. I think its funny that in 02 and 03, McCain was one of the ones behind the war saying that victory would be easy and not take long. He's still behind the war, except now he says that he knew it'd be long and hard from the beginning and that those who voted for it and thought it would be quick and easy were mistaken. A flip-flop that I find disgusting.
The public also plays a role in the erosion of our judiciary. Since many citizens lack basic knowledge of our Constitution and federalist system, they are easily manipulated by media and academic elites who tell them that judges are the absolute and final arbiters of US law. But the Supreme Court is not supreme over the other branches of government; it is supreme only over lower federal courts. If Americans wish to be free of judicial tyranny, they must at least develop basic knowledge of the judicial role in our republican government. The present state of affairs is a direct result of our collective ignorance.--------------Ron Paul
Thanks for the comment on my blog. I totally agree with you on this. I think Ron still has a fighting chance at winning the election. I don't know of anyone that's happy about the potential of McCain being the nominee. Now that there are fewer and fewer options, yet people still seem to be searching for someone better, I think it's a great opportunity for Paul to stand out and gain some ground with those that haven't given up yet.
I really don't know if I could say I think he has a chance, but I don't think its impossible. I do know that there are more delegates for him than people realize.
ps im undecided on who my vote is going for...all the war and economy is the confusing stuff but i know where i stand in the other issues like gay marriage, abortion, and scientific research.
thank you for visiting my blog - I have viewed the constitution party's platform. I actually agree with most of the platform on the basis of my religious and philosophical beliefs. However, I think that a better strategy would be to educate and reform the Republican party to the Constitution Party's ideals, rather than leave the Republican party.
All of this is a moot conversation since Ron Paul has no earthly chance at winning the presidency in 2008. I am not saying anything about Ron Paul's stance on any issues, just the reality of the situation. A more productive conversation might be who is the lesser of two evils? Barack Obama (or Hillary Clinton) or John Mcain?
Evil is evil, and I refuse to vote for one liberal to keep another liberal out of office. I refuse to vote for someone who is a warmonger, a socialist, or anything else that will make this nation continue its downward spiral. The only way we will EVER change this nation is if we change the way we vote. If people all voted their conscience/who they liked there'd be no way McCain would be our Republican candidate, because the majority of Republicans can't stand him.
I think that calling John Mcain "evil" is pretty strong. He might be more conservative than you think.
I saw this happen in 1992 and 1996. Since the Republican candidate (Bush sr and Dole) weren't Conservative enough (I.e., Reagan), many on the right voted for Ross Perot, thus dividing the anti-Clinton majority, hence, putting Clinton in office. Clinton could not win more then 43% of the popular vote and could have easily lost. Due to the Perot factor, Clinton was easily both times. That same thing could happen in 2008 if we aren't careful.
Right now, a vote for Ron Paul or anyone else for that matter, will divide the anti-Barack or anti-Hillary majority thus putting one of them in office for potentially 8 years. Then you would have liberal judges appointed to the Supreme court who write their own laws instead of interpreting the constitution, a gay rights agenda, abortion rights, runaway spending (Yes, Republicans are terrible with spending but the Dem's are worse!), etc.
As I said, Mcain is the lesser of two evils. A vote for Paul or anyone else RIGHT NOW is a vote for Obama or Hillary.
You called him evil yourself- "more productive conversation might be who is the lesser of two evils? Obama or McCain?"
I'm not going to try to defend my position on voting principles any further in this discussion. I know most people don't,and won't, get where I'm coming from.
OK - I meant "lesser of two evils" as a figure of speech, as in "both candidates are bad". How did you mean "evil" when you used it?
Also, its not that I "cant or wont" get where you are "coming from" ... I just disagree with you on why Paul is worthy of a vote. Please re-read my post (without the word "evil" in it :) ) and seriously think about why a vote for Ron Paul at this stage of this presidential race is actually a vote for Hillary or Obama.
Me and a certain someone celebrated our 1-year dating anniversary today :). We've had our ups and downs, but with lots of love and God's help, we've made it this far and it's been a great year. I'm looking forward to many more ;). I love you!
I'm interested on what you other reasons for supporting RP are. I'm trying to understand the appeal on why many Christians feel that he is the right candidate to lead this country. What puzzles me most is that they support him, regardless of his stand on homosexual marriage
I'm not gonna refuse to vote for a man just because he believes the definition of marriage should be left up to the states. Especially when he's the best candidate in so many other ways.
There are a great deal of reasons for the decrease of the dollar and it isn't the Federal Reserve completely, although I will admit that the Fed is corrupt. Also the Fed isn't unconstitutional,since it was made by Congress, but it's probably irrational. The issue I have is that there are more economic experts that disagree with Ron's idea of Austrian free market hard money. If you read John Maynard Keynes he is the foremost economist, the creator of modern microeconomics as we know it, and he was opposed to the Hayek type of economics Ron Paul promotes. So it's all about understanding the value of money and the economic system.
I don’t care if Keynesian economics is the most widely accepted, I disagree with the basic ideas of it (with what little economics understanding I have) and have a feeling it’s philosophy is behind a lot of our country’s economic woes. Keynesian policies take a fundamentally collectivist approach and require centralized planning, which leads to over controlling government abuses. Keynes even once admitted that his system works better in a socialist or fascist society.
That is quite interesting. I never knew that Keynes said that. Also judging by our current stockmarket, there may be some problems with his methods lol
Hello - do we know each other? I am just curious. One of the problems with Pleonast is that I don't know your identity :)
Re: Ron Paul. I understand his foreign policy views pretty well. I understand that our country is in some tangled webs, Ron Paul makes a pretty good point at that. Is the answer to leave Pakistan alone and risk the chance of letting Osama Bin Laden (or one of his agents) get control of the political process thus acquiring the access to 60 + nukes? That is not a reasonable solution.
Plus, Ron Paul talks a good game of less spending by the federal govt ... sadly, like most politicians that doesn't apply to him as he brings home his share of pork barrell projects to his district :(
So many of the things our government does related to foreign policy are based on "what ifs". We're always doing things to affect/stop/start/
prevent/etc. things, and this is why our military spending is out of control. I mean, we've been funding Pakistan's evil dictator for years, because he grudgingly agreed to help us fight terrorism, but we don't even know for sure how much he's actually been helping us, and it looks like Pakistan is the country harboring a lot of our enemies.
As for the earmark thing. A lot of people don't understand what earmarks are. That is money that has already been allocated to be spent by the government. He has a choice. Let that money be spent by the beaurocrats on wasteful government projects, or earmark some to go back to his district so that they can have some of their tax money returned to them, in a sense. Either way, it's going to be spent. He puts the earmarks in, but he always votes no on the bill. He knows the money is going to be spent anyway, so why not have some of it go back to the taxpayers instead of to the buearocrats? Even if all earmarks were eliminated, it wouldn't cut government spending a bit.
