Anyone for Tea?…

Well, they did it. Before anyone accuses me of playing the “blame game,” I am again merely asking that responsibility be acknowledged. Anyway, its really unnecessary as that small band of ruthlessly dedicated fundamentalists are celebrating their David and Goliath feat. Their unswerving faith and adherence to their cause has demonstrated to the world how seriously they need to be taken. Once again a pillar of our financial institutions lies in smoking ruins. The irony, of course, is that their martyrdom is irrelevant as their avowed aversion to revenue hikes in our budget, the very principle with which they and their Right Wing conspirators, brought about this tragedy, is moot. China has said that she must insist we include them in our budget. Now, instead of doing the logical thing and finding a reasonable compromise ( the very one suggested by our President,) in a timely and independent manner, this once great nation must bow its knee to the whim of another and when asked to jump, must reply, how high? The Right has been consistently saying over the last few weeks that the Left have been using ” scare tactics” and that all of this is no big deal. I hope they are right. I am simply concerned that with our global reputation downgraded for the first time in history, there will be severe consequences, and that we will begin to count the very real human cost in the lives of the needy for years to come.

Advertisements

79 thoughts on “Anyone for Tea?…

  1. Charles,There is no way to get hold of you privately so this is my only recourse. When I did not see my last post up from Sunday, August 14th, I thought it may be because you were really offended by it. Then I put one up on the Corporations are People addressed to Karen and when that did not show up I thought he must REALLY be angry. It really hurt to imagine you might "block" me off the site.Thinking about it, I thought how harsh and possibly rude that must have sounded and I regretted ever sending it. Then I got to thinking, I'm GLAD he did not publish it. So I decided to send an apology and was stunned to see Sunday's post up today. My heart just sank. Ouch.Anyhow, I am truly sorry. I'm sure you feel some of what I said was really not my place. So it shows a lot of character for you to put it up there. I just wish now you had not. Its a reminder of how you instructed everyone to make sure of what you want to say before you hit that send button.Thank you for your time.

  2. Charles, I am so glad you returned back from your trip to visit your mum safely. That is the pleasant part. Now, the unpleasant part. I thought maybe your ignoring certain questions on this blog might be because you prefer to respond to those who you think are on the same intellectual level as your own. But when I see Karen being ignored and how intelligent she is, I know that can't be true. That would mean you think most of us have IQs equivalent to that of cave dwellers.Here is the scenario:You post your blog topic and give your overview. Then the comments start rolling in. Once in a while you will pop up and give a pat on the back to those who agree with you. That is not debating. The only debating that goes on is between the ladies themselves. You never debate or step up to the plate to answer some tough questions by your more conservative bloggers. If patting on the back is all you want to do, then give a little to those who come up with the opposing point of view and put themselves out there (that takes courage). Then they will not feel slighted by you.Earlier, when facts were presented to you, you stated "facts are tricky things." What? What is that suppose to mean? Facts are facts. Either you have them or you don't. If you don't want to face them, thats something else.Your reference to "there is one of 'me' and a lot of 'you'" is strange. How many do you consider a lot? There does not appear to be an overwhelming amount of people here and it is usually the same people most of the time. I don't think anyone expects you to respond to every little comment. We know you are busy. However, I will bet most of your followers are also busy. Most people have families, jobs, some are single parents – yet take out the time to share opinions/views on your blog (as you have encouraged us to do). Why? Because WE LIKE YOU, Charles.I hope this post does not sound too harsh. I am not even angry; just a bit disappointed. Charles you are a dear and I respect you no less now than I did the first day I started blogging on this site (and even before that!).Take care.

  3. @jeannie I think you have a point there, but isn´t that what blogs are about?I´m enjoying and learning through all your comments and haven´t commented on this blog as the material is somewhat too complicted to register for an outsider and if I don´t have a good answer I don´t post LOL.

  4. Okay so maybe i suck at politics. So would i even be considered on the intellectual tag team or more like the blog cheerleader? A rabble rowser? Egg-er on maybe? Just trying to figure out where a redneck would fit in round here. Or do i? The blog pest maybe?

  5. What?? So watching us sweat it out was all for the sport of it? Oh well, wouldn't be the first or worst time i have been used by a great looking guy. And hopefully not the last. Mud wrestle away. Hopefully i can tag along with you all intellectuals. Or join in your Tag team that is..

  6. So basically, then sir…Deidre is right. This is mud wrestling for intellectuals(big wink). I just really wish I could wrap my brain around having a corrupted, bought and paid for by lobbyists and special interests government…and still thinking giving them more money is a good idea. I really wonder what would happen if they sent 6 liberal progressive women and 6 conservative women into a room with that budget…what we could do. We'd have the pork slashed out of there in no time, and probably have coupons to get a discount on the things we do need to spend on! Then we could see the necessary expenses vs. the income…and go from there. It just seems so common sense to me, but maybe I'm oversimplifying it because I'm not a finance person. The politicians are NOT going to increase the taxes on the rich…they won't bite the hand that feeds them. Therefore, cutting spending seems to be the only viable option, and then we need to step up to the plate and create help where it is cut…and it will probably be more efficient too.

  7. Charlie: Thanks for replying. I can give you an historical example to show you that there is a clear difference between reactionary and conservative. In the 1760s and 1770s, colonists were divided on how to respond to changes in British imperial policy (increased taxation, more efficient enforcement of the Navigation Acts, quartering of soldiers in the colonies, restricting settlement, etc.). Revolutionaries–those folks who ultimately brought us the Boston Tea Party as a reaction to what today we would call a corporate bailout with the Tea Act–were reactionaries in the sense that they objected to any change in the relationship between the colonies and England. They weren't just rebelling against taxes. They were upset that the Proclamation of 1763 limited settlement west of the Appalachians (and thus would keep the colonists closer to the Atlantic coast, where colonial officials could more closely watch their activity). They were upset that Parliament was passed revenue measures (including both direct taxes like the Stamp Act and indirect taxes like the Townshend Duties) without the colonists' having a voice in the discussions and debates (this is where the cries of 'no taxation without representation' develop, as the colonists did have functioning assemblies in which residents of the colonies elected representatives who passed laws that included levying taxes). They were angry that violations of trade laws (and failure to pay taxes such as the Stamp Act) would result in being tried in Vice Admiralty Courts, where there was no trial by jury. Colonists didn't understand why troops had to be stationed in the colonies–and, if they were quartered here to protect the colonists from Native American attacks, why they were in Boston, New York, Philadelphia, etc. and not along the frontier. They didn't like the change that was occurring, so they rebelled. In a sense, they wanted a return to the status quo, a return to the times before Britain had to cope with the challenges of administering a global empire, a return to the era of salutary neglect.In contrast, at the same time there were colonists–Conservatives–who understood that Britain did have some financial issues following the French and Indian War, but they didn't like the new regulations and revenue measures that Parliament was passing. Ultimately, when it came time to rebel, these Conservatives generally didn't join in the fray. They wanted reconciliation with Britain, even after shots were fired in Lexington and Concord. They later would be called Loyalists and/or Tories, and they would pay the price for their support for England, both physically and financially.So Charlie, you might not think that there really isn't much of a semantic difference between Reactionary and Conservative, but there is. And certainly Loyalists whose property was confiscated, homes were burnt to the ground, and whose bodies were physically assaulted, were well aware of the difference between opposing change and reluctantly accepting it. As a side note—there were no “liberals” at this time, because the last thing the Founding Fathers wanted was social and political equality.

  8. I think only Karen can answer your reply but still am not clear. I know we don't expect you to answer us everytime because you are busy. But you will not budge even an inch when she provides facts to you that are different than your own. Sorry Karen I tried. Take Care all and God Bless all of you.

  9. I really don't want to get dragged into answering EVERY comment simply because there is one of "me" to a lot of "you," and I am not ignoring Karen, but when you say that the Dems are opposed to spending cuts after the dems have proposed MORE cuts than the Republicans did only to have it rejected BECAUSE they also included and end to the Bush CUTS, it makes it moot for me to comment. Also, semantically, I really don't see any more than a fine-hair-split between "reluctant to accept change " and " opposed to change," but maybe that's just me. And, once again, I am delighted by the debate , so keep it coming!!..just don't expect constant replies. OK?

  10. Wow Charles, Karen is so intelligent when it comes to politics and has done her research but she just keeps getting overlooked. You may not always agree with her but you have to give her credit for all she does know and it is not always for Democrats side. Its too bad. Hey Lilly, Joan, Jeannie and all, hope all is well. Have a great day. Lilly, we all have a sad story to tell, we just want someone to hear us. Take Care. Luv you guys and I have learned alot from all.

  11. If that's the way you truly feel, Charlie, why do you even bother posting a blog for us to comment and discuss/debate issues with you? Because it's inherently clear that you don't want to read or consider any other perspective than your own, and you are stuck in the "Bush is/was evil" mindset that is typical of most liberals I know. You refuse to answer any questions we ask for clarification (well, at least the ones I have asked for clarification), and I'm beginning to wonder if it's worth the time and effort to follow and participate in this blog. I do have to remind myself that you are not this angry and bitter in person as you are on the blog (at least you haven’t been when I have had the pleasure of meeting you). By the way, for those who are interested, “conservative” and “reactionary” are NOT interchangeable terms. Conservative means reluctant to accept change, while reactionary means opposed to change (just look up the terms in a dictionary—these are not my definitions). There is a difference; conservatives will accept change but will do so kicking and screaming (kind of like a child being sent to bed); reactionaries will not budge. In contrast, “liberal” and “progressive” CAN be considered interchangeable, since one of the definitions of “liberal” is progressive in political and social matters (another definition is tolerant of different views and open-minded—certainly not something I have seen from Charlie on this blog). Yes, it’s a matter of semantics—but it is an important distinction. In some ways, then, Democrats who don’t want to consider spending cuts are just as reactionary as Republicans who don’t want to adjust tax rates.

  12. I am so happy to hear from you! I was starting to think you found another blog to argue your opinions on.I love coming on here and reading what everyone has to say although I am one of the few on here with a different opinion. I admit I don't really post on here as much as I would like to it feels a little overwhelming on here at times. But it has gotten me interested in learning more about government the ins and outs of it I guess you could say. I hope to read another blog from you soon. Maybe something other than politics, since the debt ceiling situation has been taken care of for the moment. Can't wait to watch Happily Divorced on Wednesday the previews looked really good.

  13. Ha Ha! Yes, grief stricken here as well. Had to console Jeanie online half of last night. We are temporarily emotionally impaired due to only-connect blog. Where may we file a grievance?

  14. Whew! Happy to hear from you again. We needed a blog author life raft! Happy you are an American too. Jeannie is pretty upset at this point. Hoping she will be returning again. If i know her she will. lol Great summary comment there! And i so agree. (What a surprise?) You really cut to chase which was good & needed. We tend to stray off the main points sometimes. Namely me! Thanks for putting us back on clearer heading.

  15. Ok, I am back from the UK. So happy I am an American!! Some of you are upset that I am not answwering back on some of these comments. Well, a.) it would be impossible to deal with every issue. b.) a lot of them seem to be "he said, she said" type arguments. Facts are tricky things and some of you are simply seeing "facts" differently from me and others. e.g. I see the facts as the Republican side of the aisle deeply committed to blocking any kind of revenue deal ( letting tax cuts run out,) and some of you see this as Democratic demagoguery. So….I will leave well alone and say only that I seem to be in agreement ( most of the time,) with Jeannie and Candi for the most part. As for my comment in the "Guy" magazine, it was pretty well misquoted. What I DID say and DO believe is that my it's definition the Conservative or reactionary POV defends the status quo and, as such, is inherently suspicious of the Liberal or progressive POV. You only have to compare the "my way or the highway" , " you're either wi' us or agin' us" quotes from GBW with the endless talk of compromise and debate as used to death by Obama. The conversation always looks to the liberal voice to move the goalposts in morality, sexual orientation, social reform, racial reform, etc. and the conservative voice tries to slow it down as "godless", immoral, dangerous and subversive. That has nothing to do with the lively debates we have here or that occur all over our society. But it is, I believe, an accurate assessment of the opposing POV's.

  16. I just went to the GuySpy website that Karen referred to so I could read the interview with Charles. Gee, I wish someone would have explained as to what type of a cite that is just because I was not expecting that. At first it looked like a guy's health club. Sorry, but I just do not like to be shocked like that. Anyway, after some painful clicking, I did find the article. And yes, Karen, you are right. Charles' remark about the conservative side not wanting to debate was stunning. Charles likes to give his opinion about the problems with, lets say, the Republicans and the Tea Party for example. However, I do not see a lot of debate coming from him. In his defense, maybe he is trying to be a gentleman about it so he does not get into the middle of an argument. However, since it is his blog you think he would be more open to discussion and debate on an opposing viewpoint. Dare I bring up religion? In any event, if your view disagrees with Charles, its most likely he will not get involved. And then yet, maybe he just likes to see each of you go at each other! Actually, it CAN be quite entertaining at times.Goodbye!

  17. Oh, my goodness. I just go back to this blog after my last post. A lot of fireworks going off. Is it usually like this? First of all, I feel a little embarrassed about having gone on about my own personal loss. For those of you who responded, that was very thoughtful. Thank you. Sometimes I get very emotional after watching the news. And, Diane, I am O.K. You are very sweet. Hope you are having a lovely vacation.Skat 35, I noticed you mentioned maybe we should all become independents. How funny because I was going to mention I am a registered independent. And why is it not easy to become an independent? For me the Democratic party was just too liberal on some issues and I do not agree with the Republican party on some issues. So what is a person to do? Did you notice no one every blames independents for anything? We rarely get mentioned. But that does not mean we do not have any power. Every time there is a presidential election, it is the independents who could potentially make an election go a certain way.There is so much intelligence and passion coming out of all of you. Its great because I am learning a lot about politics. Some of it I do not like very much. It is like a necessary evil in our society. My opinion is both sides have some blame for the economy. Democrats did have control of the White House AND Congress and were still crippled. So what happened?I really believe Jeannie truly believes in what she is saying. And you do here Republicans talking more about cutting than spending. But in a way, isn't it simple in theory? For an individual or company in debt to get back on its feet, you have to stop spending so much and increase what you bring in. I think that is the same for the nation and the economy. You have to do both.And here is something to think about. If it is hard for some individuals on this blog to agree on things, how hard it must be for Congress with so many members and so many different views to agree.Take care.

  18. Candi, thank you! "A few but very powerful, greedy people out there still making a lot of profit on these endless wars, same people profit during any crisis situation to include but not limited to economic turmoil. Obama has only proven that the president is no longer employed by We The People but bows and caters to those in control, aka those with money." and to add to that, those same people are the ones funneling money into the campaign coffers on both sides(hey, it's a win-win for them!). And it's also why I agree with the Tea Party on some level…these same profiteer pimps with their politician prostitutes should NOT be given any more money to squander, to waste on pork, to create even more broken bureaucracies. The problems are real, and we need to find a way to create safety for those who CAN NOT take care of themselves, and those who need a temporary hand up. The mess that exists now is broken beyond repair.

  19. There's really so little to talk about anymore. During the Bush administration, the world as we knew it was sent into a head spin so extreme that many will find themselves caught up in the idea that simply having a democratic president fixed the situation. What it did for many was give them a much sought after reason to once again bury their head in the sand. (not said in a negative tone, they’re perhaps better off?) Others are very well intended, running around wide awake on watch at all times in an effort to never let what happened ever happen again. Though, unless the core of the problem is known they are doing nothing more than attempting to stomp on lit fuses… those fuses go nowhere, the bomb has already gone off, we’re still in the fallout. What the nightmares faced during the Bush administration did for people like myself was make me very awake to the fact that there is a great deal of corruption taking place in the world. A few but very powerful, greedy people out there still making a lot of profit on these endless wars, same people profit during any crisis situation to include but not limited to economic turmoil. Obama has only proven that the president is no longer employed by We The People but bows and caters to those in control, aka those with money. This situation we've found ourselves in was predicted by the wise men who founded this nation, by way of direct, to the point warning. Franklin detailed the clues in which to look for in his writing of "Rules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One". Madison really hits home with these brief and sadly all too applicable words… "Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes. And armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended. Its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war. . . and in the degeneracy of manners and morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare". Seems some of us tend to get caught in the web that has been spun, looping in the vicious circle of talking points, but fail to see the forest for the trees. This forest is ablaze on all sides. There is no one in office that is working toward putting it out. There are a scarce few that have been shouting the realities from the rooftops for over a decade, but of course because they are the minority their cries are ignored. I am not talking about party lines or the fact that there are more of one than another, I am talking about people from differing parties that share the same concerns about the future of this country as a result of today's realities of yesterday's warnings. It’s out of control because it’s out of our control… and has been for a very long time. I am not here to argue or tell anyone they are right or wrong, this is a song from a random bird that happened to be flying over your neighborhood. I am in no way a member of the Tea Party. I am a pacifist, liberal that gave up on labels a long time ago. I will end this by saying, I’ve learned the true meaning of living in the moment and taking time out to smell the roses. All love and well wishes, “be the change you want to see in the world” waiting around for others to create it has proven foolish. I cannot end their manufactered wars, but I can do what I can to not be a part of our own. Tea Party seems quite intent on taking the opposite approach. Living in some strange times. Hold tight to the truth… "only love can conquer hate".

  20. There's really so little to talk about anymore. During the Bush administration, the world as we knew it was sent into a head spin so extreme that many will find themselves caught up in the idea that simply having a democratic president fixed the situation. What it did for many was give them a much sought after reason to once again bury their head in the sand. (not said in a negative tone, they’re perhaps better off?) Others are very well intended, running around wide awake on watch at all times in an effort to never let what happened ever happen again. Though, unless the core of the problem is known they are doing nothing more than attempting to stomp on lit fuses… those fuses go nowhere, the bomb has already gone off, we’re still in the fallout. What the nightmares faced during the Bush administration did for people like myself was make me very awake to the fact that there is a great deal of corruption taking place in the world. A few but very powerful, greedy people out there still making a lot of profit on these endless wars, same people profit during any crisis situation to include but not limited to economic turmoil. Obama has only proven that the president is no longer employed by We The People but bows and caters to those in control, aka those with money. This situation we've found ourselves in was predicted by the wise men who founded this nation, by way of direct, to the point warning. Franklin detailed the clues in which to look for in his writing of "Rules by Which a Great Empire May Be Reduced to a Small One". Madison really hits home with these brief and sadly all too applicable words… "Of all the enemies to public liberty war is, perhaps, the most to be dreaded because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. War is the parent of armies; from these proceed debts and taxes. And armies, and debts, and taxes are the known instruments for bringing the many under the domination of the few. In war, too, the discretionary power of the Executive is extended. Its influence in dealing out offices, honors, and emoluments is multiplied; and all the means of seducing the minds, are added to those of subduing the force of the people. The same malignant aspect in republicanism may be traced in the inequality of fortunes, and the opportunities of fraud, growing out of a state of war. . . and in the degeneracy of manners and morals, engendered by both. No nation could preserve its freedom in the midst of continual warfare". Seems some of us tend to get caught in the web that has been spun, looping in the vicious circle of talking points, but fail to see the forest for the trees. This forest is ablaze on all sides. There is no one in office that is working toward putting it out. There are a scarce few that have been shouting the realities from the rooftops for over a decade, but of course because they are the minority their cries are ignored. I am not talking about party lines or the fact that there are more of one than another, I am talking about people from differing parties that share the same concerns about the future of this country as a result of today's realities of yesterday's warnings. It’s out of control because it’s out of our control… and has been for a very long time. I am not here to argue or tell anyone they are right or wrong, this is a song from a random bird that happened to be flying over your neighborhood. I am in no way a member of the Tea Party. I am a pacifist, liberal that gave up on labels a long time ago. I will end this by saying, I’ve learned the true meaning of living in the moment and taking time out to smell the roses. All love and well wishes, “be the change you want to see in the world” waiting around for others to create it has proven foolish. I cannot end their manufactered wars, but I can do what I can to not be a part of our own. Tea Party seems quite intent on taking the opposite approach. Living in some strange times. Hold tight to the truth… "only love can conquer hate".

  21. Luv you all and Jeannie you have been a great debater. Everyone have a great day. Hey Lilly just was wondering how you are doing? Hope you are hanging in there. We truly care about you. Jeannie haven't really backed up any of my statements because Karen does such a fine job and I am on vacation and trying to not think of such things. When I feel as though I am fighting a losing battle, I usually just give up. I don't dislike you or anything like that. You seem to be a very intelligent person and a fine debater. Since Charles is busy he is not here to back you up, so lately you've been on your own. Kinda know what that feels like with my religion opinion on a few blogs ago. Well I just couldn't let it bother me as I am going to believe what I believe and don't really care what others think when it comes to religion. I have studied religion much more than politics. No problem here with you, just didn't want to keep upsetting you.

  22. @Lily I am also sorry for your loss. Jeannie was right in stating sometimes we may not understand what makes folks tick because we have not been through the same trials. I am sorry if i offended anyone also with my ideas. But i am me do to trials that i have gone through too made me think they way i do. I don;t trust people, so perhaps makes it hard to trust in God. Unfortunately this blog now reminds me of why the two parties cannot seem to get along. Let's all become independents. Wish it was that easy. I think you guys were to hard on Jeannie though. Blogs are places to post opinions and she is being singled out. Worries me if we can argue this much on a blog, ain't any wonder there was a civil war in this country. Respect your opinions and all but don't know how to respond anymore. Guess you guys have a hostile blog takeover. Knew i can't change your minds. Just trying to expose you guys to others ideas such as mine. We are who we are and set in our ways i reckon. Can see you guys are not interested in any other ideas. This is not suppose to be who is right and who is wrong. If i want to debate like that i will go to a redneck bar and brawl some. Sure i can find some wrongs there to try and right. I prefer to let them party instead. Who am i to judge them in their company? I am there too.

  23. Okay, I'm still a bit confused here. Why is it so difficult for people to understand that blaming one party accomplishes nothing? Both the Republicans and the Democrats are equally responsible for the mess this country is experiencing right now. Both parties' leaders in Congress have dug in their heels and basically are waiting for the other side to blink, which it doesn't look like will happen any time soon. You can't blame the debt crisis on the Bush tax cuts (even if they were extended because of negotiations to get an unemployment bill passed), just like you can't blame the debt crisis on "Bush's war" (which, again, was continued under the leadership of Democratic President Obama and the Democratic-controlled Congress). If you choose to do that—why aren’t you looking at the fiscal/banking policies developed during the Clinton administration, which also contributed to this mess? Why are the majority of Obama’s economic advisors bailing on his administration? It can’t just be because they are tired of dealing with Republicans in Congress. Both parties are equally responsible! In some ways, this whole mess reminds me of those Lite Beer commercials from the 1980s—Great Taste versus Less Filling, when they argued over why they drank the beer—but they did agree that the beer was good. In this case, both parties recognize that there is a problem; they just differ on how to solve it. By the way, as a parting thought on this topic (at least for now)—I’d love for the liberal participants in this blog to explain why they seem to overlook the fact that not all Tea Party supporters are Republicans. Tea Party and Republican are NOT interchangeable terms.And Lilly—while I personally have not felt your pain, I do admire your courage. I have not had any family members who have died in combat (at least none that I have known personally), but I have had students who were killed in combat (and received their college degrees posthumously). Our university requires first-year students to be engaged in some sort of service activity, and my first-year classes have collected supplies for National Guard troops from the area who are deployed in the Middle East.

  24. Hmmm! Well Diane, no one got offended. I simply asked you to back up some of your statements. Apparently you had nothing with which to do so. I find it disheartening to think that it is o.k. for you to call me out on my statements, but I am not given the same courtesy. It seems hypocritical. Because someone disagrees with you, you automatically assume that they are offended or angry. I am the only one on here who is defending my position and so I think it is easy for you to take your frustrations out on me. As I stated before, I am o.k. with that. I have tried to state my position in an objective and fair manner without insult. I do not hold my opinions to offend anyone, but if they do, I cannot apologize.To All:Nevertheless, considering that we are accomplishing nothing by this continued dialogue and because I have fallen behind on laundry, I now officially bow out. Most of you know how to reach me if you really feel the need to add anything to your comments. I welcome your ideas and consider you friends even in disagreement.

  25. @ Jeannie Again instead of listening you become offended whenever anyone disagrees with you. Ok you win everything you say is true. I know how to do this I will just agree with you and no ones feeling get hurt. I can't get too excited I am on vacation and having a good time. Take Care All. Lilly hang in there thinking of you.

  26. Obviously my heart goes out to Lily and all of the families who have lost loved ones in the process of fighting for our country. We cannot put a price on their sacrifice. They are real husbands, fathers, sons, brothers, and friends. They are loved and missed. I don't think hearts ever really heal from such a loss. It is tragic! I wish that no person ever again had to lose their life in war. Somehow calling them heroes does not seem like enough!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s