Last night TWS and I went out on a date. We have the single most phenomenal babysitter EVER. Her name is Michaela. She is incredibly poised, looks adults in the eye in an open and not sullen manner, and washes the dishes when she babysits. Honestly, I would adopt her if I could!
Our dates are very very mundane. And I love that! We go out to supper, either go shooting or go shopping, and usually end up at the bookstore getting Godiva Choc Cheesecake for me, and whatever he wants.
I love the comfortableness of our relationship. I am thoroughly blessed.
We bought some Christmas presents, including something for my folks. I want to tell you all about it, but my mom might accidentally read the blog and that would blow the surprise!
I am not sure if all y'all know, but I headcover. You have probably seen it in some of the pics I have posted. I do not feel that one must always headcover. And last night, because we were on a date, I considered not covering (not that TWS cares one way or the other, but frankly my hair was kinda cute!). I decided to put it on anyway, and I am glad I did. I ran into our neighbors who seem very nice but are most definitely witches (as in, that is what they proclaim as their religion, not that I am being catty). She had on her cape and amulets or whatever, and I was standing in my headcovering. We said hello briefly, I talked to her husband for a moment, and then it was over. However, I was very thankful to be wearing my faith when I ran into someone who was wearing their beliefs. I was thankful that I was ready "in season and out of season...". It was the Holy Spirit who arranged me to be prepared...frankly I was just tickled with my hair!
(Thank You Lord for making me ready for that one brief moment where I could be a witness for You!)
Speaking of hair, the no poo is going REALLY well. I still use mane and tail conditioner, and it still helps if I am under the water when I scrub. But I am very much enjoying my hair. I think I will keep with the conditioner only regimen.
Back to my folks coming to visit....I am trying to figure out what I can get done ahead of time! I am very eager to make a lot of candy this season. SHAW and I have been pouring over blogs of numminess. I want to make pies, cakes, etc. However, I am also finding out that after the first two days of looking at very sweet, sugary, rich foods, I am finding myself actually wanting to bake and eat some very simple bread.
So I have baked bread and dug out my science experiments (AKA my sourdough starters) from the back of the fridge and am going to try to get them going again. If I cannot, then I still have time to order starter from king arthur (the food blog there is beyond!). My plan when my folks visit is to have very simple breakfasts of cheese, bread, fruit. That will keep our blood sugars from going so wonky, and will also free up the rest of the day for numminess :-).
I have found that eating protein only for breakfast (or something with a TON of fat in it), feels so much better. No crashes, no spikes. This is a FAR cry from what i have preferred my whole life. Even if I woke up at 2 in the afternoon, I wanted something light and sweet before eating anything substantial. Now I pretty much have either chicken, cheese, pork or moose for breakfast. Just that and coffee. Took me a while to get used to it, but man, the day goes so much better that way!
Now, one odd thing is that if I eat something that is SUPER high in fat, like donuts, I am not hungry for hours and hours. If I eat waffles or pancakes or diet shakes, I am hungry in about 20-40 minutes. But donuts keep me going to past lunch. Maybe because your body wants fat for breakfast? I don't know. I just know that donuts do the trick. I have even thought of going on a donut diet! I knew a lady who lost 40 lbs eating only chocolate. She was even on one of those morning shows! Probably not the healthiest, but MAN what a nifty way to diet!
Speaking of food, I have some left over chicken from Chilis with my name on it just crying out to me in the kitchen!
Saturday, November 15, 2008
Saturday, November 8, 2008
Going no poo
I have been conducting an experiment the past week about goind "no poo", or using no shampoo. I MUST wash my hair every night if I intend to be presentable the next day. I might can limp through if I put cornstarch on my hairbrush, but really I need to wash my hair.
However, it is firmly winter and my hair was exceedingly dry at the ends to where I was getting split ends. That almost never happens to me, so I knew the weather was taking its toll.
There was a bit of a spiritual quandry at this realization as I had just been blessed with a check from my mother. I WANTED to spend it on hair cuts and perms with Precious, but, long story short, I realized that it was better if I did not spend it on that. Instead I put it to meat to be used for the family.
However, that still left me with raggedy hair. So I had my 12 yr old cut it. Yep. I had Precious cut my hair. It was only the second time (iirc) in my adult life that my hair was cut at home. It was the first time she had EVER cut hair. BUT it is only hair, right? So I let her go to it.
With careful coaching (which is kind of hilarious since I had no idea what I was doing either), I talked Prec. through the hair cut. She did a phenomenal job! She has a very good eye, and there was very little difference or bad angles from one side to the other. I had her just under cut it, then cut the other layers longer, but the cut was blunt. The next morning I decided i wanted a bit of an angle, so I cut the angle myself (should have let her do it though!).
Now, I thought that going to get perms together would be an excellent fun thing. But I honestly think she got so much out of being able to actually cut my hair. I showed I trusted her, she got a VERY important job, and she got a feeling of satisfaction.
Anyway, since my hair was so raggedly before she cut it (and because I was talking to SHAW about what to do about HER hair), I started researching how people go "no poo". After much reading I found that, as many things on the internet, there is a lot of enthusiasm for a process that is only marginally successful. I read enough to know that washing with baking soda was going to be very irritating to my scalp, and washing with apple cider vinegar was not going to "cut it". There was so much disappointment and confusion, that it almost seemed like only a few people hit the exact right combination (after weeks "detox" where their scalp produces so much oil that they could not really go out). I heard enough references to "barbie hair" that I knew that was not for me.
Now, I have a dear friend who washes her daughter's hair with conditioner ONLY. Her daughters have mixed heritage, and the ringlets on her youngest are softer than silk with just using conditioner.
So I decided to try conditioner only on a week that I did not need to go out too much. I figured I would try it, day by day, and just stop if it does not work. I also wanted to try out what I had heard. Some people are so excited about a new thing, that they post "I have been going 'no poo' for a day and I love it!". I wanted to post this as a document of my trial of no poo--for good or ill.
I must say I am incredibly, and pleasantly, surprised with the results SO FAR. I use mane and tail conditioner. I have been doing this for several days, not quite a week. So this is not a definitive conclusion. But just to keep you abreast....
The downsides of conditioner only are three:
A) It seems to use a lot of conditioner because there are no bubbles. I think the action of scrubbing your head is the main source of cleaning. At first I found myself using twice as much conditioner as normal to "wash" my scalp. I am learning, however, that if I wash my hair with the conditioner while under the water, I feel that the conditioner is doing a better job at cleaning.
B) As alluded to above, it takes some scrubbing. With shampoo, there are so many cleaners that they seem to act like "scrubbing bubbles" to clean your scalp without much effort. I FEEL that I need to scrub harder.
c) There is not the feeling I am used to after my hair is dried after the washing. (however, read below where I talk about when I washed my hair with shampoo to see the difference).
The upsides of CO (conditioner only) are these
a) Less drying chemicals. Conditioner is supposed to add moisture and coating. Shampoo is supposed to strip things away. Stripping away means that your hair is unprotected.
b) My hair SEEMS to hold a curl better and for longer. I want to experiment with this further however, so do not think of this as a definite statement.
c) My hair STYLES better. This is for absolute certainty.
After many days with CO, I tried shampoo. I wanted to see if there is a difference in how my hair behaves, but to be honest, I also felt that I wanted my hair to FEEL more clean.
For many days wiht the CO, my hair had looked very shiny, healthy, bouncy and CLEAN. It looked clean, but it felt different. So two days ago I tried only shampoo. I looked at it as a scientific experiment: I wanted to see what my hair would do. My scalp did feel much "cleaner" BUT it did not look any better at all, in fact, my hair seemed to be greasier later in the day than with CO (this also needs to be repeated to make sure it is actually because of the shampoo, and not because of hormones, etc).
Also, my hair was an absolute NIGHTMARE to brush and style the next day. I have started brushing my hair 100 times in the morning--50 times upside down and 50 times right side up. When using CO, my hair might be slightly unruly for about the first 25 brushes, but after that, my hair suddenly calmed down, accepted the brushing without problem, and my hair looked shiny and healthy. When I brushed my hair after shampoo, I kid you not that the static made some of my hair stand out almost 90 degrees from my head. It was one mass of static and unprotected hair. It was a pain in the patootie to bush and style.
I decided that the feeling I got from shampoo is from being used to the feeling of my hair and scalp being stripped of oil. It feels lighter (cleaner) but it did not LOOK any cleaner and it was a pain to brush.
I washed my hair the following night with CO and the next morning, my brushing was not full of static. It looked clean, though it did not feel as light, and behaved well.
So far, I am going to keep going with the CO method. I am also going to try a shampoo every once in a while just to see what happens. If after a considerable length of time (say 3-4 weeks) of daily or near daily CO with the rare shampoo, my hair still looks good, then I will consider this the best for my hair. If not, I will simply go back to shampoo--I am not opposed to shampoo, just wanting to find out what is best for my hair and scalp. It appeals to me to not be battling my own oil production, but rather to achieve balance so that my follicles are not under duress. I am not going to keep this up if my hair looks oily or dirty :-).
I will keep you posted!
(FWIW--my hair is straight as a board, baby fine, but I have a TON of it. I use a boar bristle brush. I have an antler comb and a plastic comb, though I usually use the plastic comb because it is usually right there in my reach. I started rolling my hair in hot rollers. I use whatever shampoo I have, and mane and tail conditioner. I use a generous squirt of paul Mitchell hair sculpting lotion and 2-3 pumps of paul mitchell smoothing "super skinny serum", which is excellent for adding shine to hair. I take this handful of "stuff" and run it through my hair, then brush, then roll. I also use a decent amount of hairspray to hold the curl (my hair HATES to keep a curl). I will hopefully post pics soon).
However, it is firmly winter and my hair was exceedingly dry at the ends to where I was getting split ends. That almost never happens to me, so I knew the weather was taking its toll.
There was a bit of a spiritual quandry at this realization as I had just been blessed with a check from my mother. I WANTED to spend it on hair cuts and perms with Precious, but, long story short, I realized that it was better if I did not spend it on that. Instead I put it to meat to be used for the family.
However, that still left me with raggedy hair. So I had my 12 yr old cut it. Yep. I had Precious cut my hair. It was only the second time (iirc) in my adult life that my hair was cut at home. It was the first time she had EVER cut hair. BUT it is only hair, right? So I let her go to it.
With careful coaching (which is kind of hilarious since I had no idea what I was doing either), I talked Prec. through the hair cut. She did a phenomenal job! She has a very good eye, and there was very little difference or bad angles from one side to the other. I had her just under cut it, then cut the other layers longer, but the cut was blunt. The next morning I decided i wanted a bit of an angle, so I cut the angle myself (should have let her do it though!).
Now, I thought that going to get perms together would be an excellent fun thing. But I honestly think she got so much out of being able to actually cut my hair. I showed I trusted her, she got a VERY important job, and she got a feeling of satisfaction.
Anyway, since my hair was so raggedly before she cut it (and because I was talking to SHAW about what to do about HER hair), I started researching how people go "no poo". After much reading I found that, as many things on the internet, there is a lot of enthusiasm for a process that is only marginally successful. I read enough to know that washing with baking soda was going to be very irritating to my scalp, and washing with apple cider vinegar was not going to "cut it". There was so much disappointment and confusion, that it almost seemed like only a few people hit the exact right combination (after weeks "detox" where their scalp produces so much oil that they could not really go out). I heard enough references to "barbie hair" that I knew that was not for me.
Now, I have a dear friend who washes her daughter's hair with conditioner ONLY. Her daughters have mixed heritage, and the ringlets on her youngest are softer than silk with just using conditioner.
So I decided to try conditioner only on a week that I did not need to go out too much. I figured I would try it, day by day, and just stop if it does not work. I also wanted to try out what I had heard. Some people are so excited about a new thing, that they post "I have been going 'no poo' for a day and I love it!". I wanted to post this as a document of my trial of no poo--for good or ill.
I must say I am incredibly, and pleasantly, surprised with the results SO FAR. I use mane and tail conditioner. I have been doing this for several days, not quite a week. So this is not a definitive conclusion. But just to keep you abreast....
The downsides of conditioner only are three:
A) It seems to use a lot of conditioner because there are no bubbles. I think the action of scrubbing your head is the main source of cleaning. At first I found myself using twice as much conditioner as normal to "wash" my scalp. I am learning, however, that if I wash my hair with the conditioner while under the water, I feel that the conditioner is doing a better job at cleaning.
B) As alluded to above, it takes some scrubbing. With shampoo, there are so many cleaners that they seem to act like "scrubbing bubbles" to clean your scalp without much effort. I FEEL that I need to scrub harder.
c) There is not the feeling I am used to after my hair is dried after the washing. (however, read below where I talk about when I washed my hair with shampoo to see the difference).
The upsides of CO (conditioner only) are these
a) Less drying chemicals. Conditioner is supposed to add moisture and coating. Shampoo is supposed to strip things away. Stripping away means that your hair is unprotected.
b) My hair SEEMS to hold a curl better and for longer. I want to experiment with this further however, so do not think of this as a definite statement.
c) My hair STYLES better. This is for absolute certainty.
After many days with CO, I tried shampoo. I wanted to see if there is a difference in how my hair behaves, but to be honest, I also felt that I wanted my hair to FEEL more clean.
For many days wiht the CO, my hair had looked very shiny, healthy, bouncy and CLEAN. It looked clean, but it felt different. So two days ago I tried only shampoo. I looked at it as a scientific experiment: I wanted to see what my hair would do. My scalp did feel much "cleaner" BUT it did not look any better at all, in fact, my hair seemed to be greasier later in the day than with CO (this also needs to be repeated to make sure it is actually because of the shampoo, and not because of hormones, etc).
Also, my hair was an absolute NIGHTMARE to brush and style the next day. I have started brushing my hair 100 times in the morning--50 times upside down and 50 times right side up. When using CO, my hair might be slightly unruly for about the first 25 brushes, but after that, my hair suddenly calmed down, accepted the brushing without problem, and my hair looked shiny and healthy. When I brushed my hair after shampoo, I kid you not that the static made some of my hair stand out almost 90 degrees from my head. It was one mass of static and unprotected hair. It was a pain in the patootie to bush and style.
I decided that the feeling I got from shampoo is from being used to the feeling of my hair and scalp being stripped of oil. It feels lighter (cleaner) but it did not LOOK any cleaner and it was a pain to brush.
I washed my hair the following night with CO and the next morning, my brushing was not full of static. It looked clean, though it did not feel as light, and behaved well.
So far, I am going to keep going with the CO method. I am also going to try a shampoo every once in a while just to see what happens. If after a considerable length of time (say 3-4 weeks) of daily or near daily CO with the rare shampoo, my hair still looks good, then I will consider this the best for my hair. If not, I will simply go back to shampoo--I am not opposed to shampoo, just wanting to find out what is best for my hair and scalp. It appeals to me to not be battling my own oil production, but rather to achieve balance so that my follicles are not under duress. I am not going to keep this up if my hair looks oily or dirty :-).
I will keep you posted!
(FWIW--my hair is straight as a board, baby fine, but I have a TON of it. I use a boar bristle brush. I have an antler comb and a plastic comb, though I usually use the plastic comb because it is usually right there in my reach. I started rolling my hair in hot rollers. I use whatever shampoo I have, and mane and tail conditioner. I use a generous squirt of paul Mitchell hair sculpting lotion and 2-3 pumps of paul mitchell smoothing "super skinny serum", which is excellent for adding shine to hair. I take this handful of "stuff" and run it through my hair, then brush, then roll. I also use a decent amount of hairspray to hold the curl (my hair HATES to keep a curl). I will hopefully post pics soon).
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Contentment
My beautiful wonderful sisters in Christ!
I hope this is a wonderful morning for you! I have not been awake very long, but so far I have been blessed beyond measure.
The Lord is doing great work in my life--quiet work, nothing huge or obvious, but great nonetheless. He is working on my contentment. In the Bible it says "Contentment with godliness is great gain". How right He is! I used to understand the verse to mean "great spiritual gain", but I understand now that it is also tremendous personal gain for myself and my family. I LIKE being content! Not striving, not stewing, not fretting. Just a happy little bee buzzing around my hive with my two little baby bees humming beside me, filling our time with work, service, and learning until daddy bee comes home :).
I am very rarely content. I have always felt a sense of striving. I am not sure why. Sometimes it is because I am discontent with my surroundings. Sometimes it is because I am discontent with myself (often that is the case, actually). I will sometimes keep a constant dialogue in my head of discontent and condemnation of myself. I felt it land square on top of me yesterday, and I spent much time in irritation at things not working right, at the cold, at myself for not watching the clock better. I started begging the Lord for us to move. I realize now that when I allow myself to do that, I get into a temper tantrum, so I stopped begging. I might not be CONTENT to be here, but at least I can stop putting fuel on the fire!
This morning i read a WONDERFUL blog...one I had not been to in a few weeks. Lady Lydia had an absolutely beautiful piece on contentment. http://homeliving.blogspot.com/ It filled me with ...well contentment! I realized that this is some of the work that the Lord is working in me right now--to be content.
I do not know why I fight contentment--it feels so wonderful! It is peaceful and pleasant, altogether wonderful. I fight it, though, because I think I will be HAPPY if things are the way I want them, when really I am called to find JOY and CONTENTMENT and PEACE, no matter what the circumstances.
What is the difference between joy and happiness? Many people do not see a difference. FOR ME, and this is me, I am reminded of a phrase I heard once "Happiness depends on happenings". Happiness is the emotion we get when things are going right in our lives (again, this is my opinion).
I did a VERY quick search in both the NIV and the KJV of happy/happiness, content/contentment, and joy/joyful to see what context they were used and how many times those words came up. This was a VERY unscientific search (I would need to go back to the original Aramaic and Hebrew to see root words, etc) but it did give me a very interesting overview:
In the Word, when looking up happy/happiness vs joy/joyful, most of the time when "happy" was used, it denoted an emotion about a positive event. For example, a woman finding herself with child, a master who calls a servant to share in the good things the master has ("come share in your master's happiness"), or even Haman when he thought he was going to get rewarded. Nearly all the verses have something to do with events that one would expect someone to be happy in.
Joy, however, is often associated with the Lord and seems to have deep spiritual roots. Praising Him with joy, or finding joy in suffering, or joy after sorrow, or joy in the Lord. Joy seems to have a deep, abiding presence, even if the "happenings" do not seem good.
Now, of course there is overlap between the two! And this does not mean that we should not be happy when the Lord has blessed us--in fact, quite the opposite! Praise Him for His mighty blessings in your life! He brings happiness to your life. He gives you moments of just pure happiness, where you can just ....well....be happy!
But to me joy is sort of like "love thy enemy" thing, and happiness is more like love that you would feel for people whom you enjoy and who bring blessing to your life. Both are quite good, but joy is one of those mysteries of the Lord that the unsaved do not understand--how you can praise the Lord even when you are in the midst of stressful or difficult situations. It is joy I think, more than happiness, that we can demonstrate in our lives to the unsaved to bring them to Christ. They already know how to be happy...but do they know the Source of joy?
Contenment falls in line, from the quick reading I read, with joy. Though not mentioned often in the Word, contentment is not dependent of what is going on in your life, but rather something deep to strive for "Godliness with contenment is great gain" and "Be content with what you have". The only two physical conditions that I saw associated with contentment were food and clothing. Anything else is just icing.
I will be honest, I fluctuate between joy (and contentment) and happiness (looking at my happenings). The only thing that saves me, I think, from making a big huge mess in my discontent is remembering Sarai (before she became Sarah) and how she lost patience about not having a baby, did not wait on the Lord, and tried to rush the Lord. I am terrified of rushing the Lord and making a mess (though I have definitely made messes before!). I know that the Lord knows what I want to be happy. But I am realizing that He wants me to be content and joyful. It is a slow lesson for me to learn! But that blog entry by Lady Lydia was balm to my spirit and mind.
What is the Lord teaching you in your life? He might be teaching you contentment too! Or maybe He is teaching you joy or patience, industry or forgiveness for yourself or for others.
He always works in your life....have you sat down today away from people, the computer, the tv, the radio, the phone and just said "Lord, what lesson are You having me learn?" and then think carefully about your recent life and see what work He is doing? Give it a try. Understand that He is teaching you EVERY minute. For me, that builds my faith because I get restless if I think that my life is in freefall, that He is not there every second. But when I realize that He is working, that makes me better--I do not feel as restless or striving.
If you do not mind, if you read this, post what the Lord is teaching you. You do not have to go into details at all if you do not want to...in fact, if He is guiding you from a personal sin, you can just say "He is guiding me from a personal sin" or "He is teaching me obedience" or something. I find it faith building for myself when I speak (either vocally or in writing) the work that the Lord is doing in my life.
So what is He teaching you today? If you do not know, go ask! :-)
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
SOAP!!!
My wonderful sisters!
Here are some pictures of the soap I made (yes I am pretty picture happy today, but with the strivings it took to get the white box set up, I figured I wanted to make the most of it!)
In the past, when I sold soap, I put the soap in muslin drawstring bags. I learned something very important this time: my packaging was all wrong with the bags! I was pretty much out of bags and decided instead to wrap the soap in wax paper. I thought it would make the bars look soft and pretty. I cannot TELL you how much I think that did to sell the soap. One person even said that they bought the soap JUST because of the packaging!
I needed a way to decorate the wax paper. Precious and I spent an inordinate amount of time in JoAnn's trying to find good stickers while TWS and Little Man had gone to the sporting good store. When they got to JoAnn's, they both helped us look for stickers and TWS found these! I should have made him go shop for stickers while I went to the sporting goods store!
This is a stack of the soap that came back with me. I sold out of one scent, so that is not in there.
A close up of the wrapping. Let me just say that wrapping these soaps was a BLAST! I have no idea why, but it just REALLY appealed to me to be making such delicate folds, smelling the sweet scent of the soap. Honestly I have decided that any soap I make I would like to wrap, even if it is for our family! I need to get more stickers though....
This is my "Kaleido-soap". I made the rest of the soap (4 scents) and chopped them down to size (at least 4 oz. Since my scale might not be precise, I add a bit extra, but the bars are advertized as 4 oz).
More soap
We had wonderful company over for shooting archery and eating on Sunday (we put a tiny little ten yard range in the garage). I wanted to put some decor in the bathroom, so I got this bowl, a bottle of crushed bath fizzie from a local lady (it smells like blueberries and just makes me happy each time I smell it!), as well as a locally hand made glass ball, and some of my soap. I thought it made a really pretty little bowl. I set this on the sink with some other pretties.
That was our day at the bazaar! I had a blast making the aprons, I had a blast making (and wrapping!) the soap, and I had a blast hanging out with Precious! I am thankful for the opportunity that the Lord offered us!
Here are some pictures of the soap I made (yes I am pretty picture happy today, but with the strivings it took to get the white box set up, I figured I wanted to make the most of it!)
In the past, when I sold soap, I put the soap in muslin drawstring bags. I learned something very important this time: my packaging was all wrong with the bags! I was pretty much out of bags and decided instead to wrap the soap in wax paper. I thought it would make the bars look soft and pretty. I cannot TELL you how much I think that did to sell the soap. One person even said that they bought the soap JUST because of the packaging!
I needed a way to decorate the wax paper. Precious and I spent an inordinate amount of time in JoAnn's trying to find good stickers while TWS and Little Man had gone to the sporting good store. When they got to JoAnn's, they both helped us look for stickers and TWS found these! I should have made him go shop for stickers while I went to the sporting goods store!
This is a stack of the soap that came back with me. I sold out of one scent, so that is not in there.
A close up of the wrapping. Let me just say that wrapping these soaps was a BLAST! I have no idea why, but it just REALLY appealed to me to be making such delicate folds, smelling the sweet scent of the soap. Honestly I have decided that any soap I make I would like to wrap, even if it is for our family! I need to get more stickers though....
This is my "Kaleido-soap". I made the rest of the soap (4 scents) and chopped them down to size (at least 4 oz. Since my scale might not be precise, I add a bit extra, but the bars are advertized as 4 oz).
Anyway, that meant that I had lots of different colored scraps. I put them in some more soap to get a multi-color effect.
Another selling gaffe: I ended up with a lot more soap in this batch, so I cut the bars into different shap (thicker and narrower), but they are the same weight. However, I think people saw the difference in size and thought it was smaller than the other bars. Oh well, live and learn :-)
More soap
We had wonderful company over for shooting archery and eating on Sunday (we put a tiny little ten yard range in the garage). I wanted to put some decor in the bathroom, so I got this bowl, a bottle of crushed bath fizzie from a local lady (it smells like blueberries and just makes me happy each time I smell it!), as well as a locally hand made glass ball, and some of my soap. I thought it made a really pretty little bowl. I set this on the sink with some other pretties.
That was our day at the bazaar! I had a blast making the aprons, I had a blast making (and wrapping!) the soap, and I had a blast hanging out with Precious! I am thankful for the opportunity that the Lord offered us!
God bless you!
PS Again with the formatting! Those soap pictures have a whole nother third that is not showing in the blog. I also put "small" pictures as a choice, and it made big huge ones. I have NO idea what the deal is...I have not done anything differently than when I have posted pictures in the past. xsighx. Well at least you get the idea!
APRONS!
My beautiful sisters!
I FINALLY got pictures taken of the aprons I made for the bazaar! (Actually these pictures are the ones I brought home--I sold out of other patterns I had brought).
I got out TWS's light box thing. I must say that it was a bear to set up! I would have liked a LOT more light, but this will do for now :-). I would love a plexi set up where the walls of the box are actually brightly lit. Sounds like a job for Super Sweetie!
I am not trying to brag, but I REALLY love these aprons. I have two that I have kept (plus one for Precious) and they just always look nice. I can throw them in the washer and dryer with anything (no special washing) and they come out looking beautiful! I feel very pretty in them when I am cooking or scrubbing out the bathroom or whatever :-).
This is the size of the adult aprons. That is me, but I had not done my hair, so I did not let Precious take a picture of my head hee hee!
Here is Precious modeling the little girl's aprons. She is tiny, but the aprons are tinier!
Here are some adult aprons
I FINALLY got pictures taken of the aprons I made for the bazaar! (Actually these pictures are the ones I brought home--I sold out of other patterns I had brought).
I got out TWS's light box thing. I must say that it was a bear to set up! I would have liked a LOT more light, but this will do for now :-). I would love a plexi set up where the walls of the box are actually brightly lit. Sounds like a job for Super Sweetie!
I am not trying to brag, but I REALLY love these aprons. I have two that I have kept (plus one for Precious) and they just always look nice. I can throw them in the washer and dryer with anything (no special washing) and they come out looking beautiful! I feel very pretty in them when I am cooking or scrubbing out the bathroom or whatever :-).
This is the size of the adult aprons. That is me, but I had not done my hair, so I did not let Precious take a picture of my head hee hee!
Here is Precious modeling the little girl's aprons. She is tiny, but the aprons are tinier!
Here are some adult aprons
More adult aprons
Here are the little girl aprons.
They sold very well at the bazaar. I definitely cannot complain! The hardest thing was convincing customers that these were to WEAR EVERY DAY to keep their clothing clean :-).
Here are the little girl aprons.
They sold very well at the bazaar. I definitely cannot complain! The hardest thing was convincing customers that these were to WEAR EVERY DAY to keep their clothing clean :-).
I am grateful to the Lord for how much ended up selling! It makes you feel good to know that people like what you have made.
I also brought soap, as my one loyal customer convinced me to. That also sold well! I will post pictures of the soap in the next entry. I sold more with the aprons and the soap than I used to with soap and other things (milk bath, bath fizzies, etc), and it was a LOT less work.
Did I tell you that Precious made earrings to sell at the bazaar? She used sculpey clay and baked it and made adorable earrings which she sold for a dollar a pair. I think she must have taken over 70 pairs to the bazaar! (She hand lettered a sign in crayon and put each pair in a little baggie and everything. She was ready for the bazaar DAYS before I was!) I praise the Lord for His kindness to her! At first she was not selling anything--just one pair--and she was SO upset. We had a talk, and I prayed that the Lord would allow her to sell more, and suddenly she was swamped! She ended up making about $40!!
Anyway, thank you for your prayers and well wishes for the bazaar! It was a blast and I kinda wish I had made more aprons and signed up for another bazaar. The season here is short. This bazaar was a great one--low table fee and pretty well visited. There are other bigger ones that I would have liked to have tried as well just for grins. Maybe next year!
God bless you my sisters in the Lord!
PS, the formatting on this post is atrocious, but I cannot figure out how to fix it! The top photo is supposed to include my other arm AND there are supposed to be spaces between the paragraphs! Sorry about that!
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
One More Barack Obama post
This time regarding homeschooling. I am a homeschooling mother, thank the Lord. I chose to homeschool for various reasons. I am in the midst of homeschooling my children, and do not want to lose that God given right to educate, to raise my children. I fear that Barack Obama would push that very thing.
I have looked up Barack Obama's record on homeschooling but have been able to find very little. A few people will point out to a quote or two in his book that seem to indicate that he is pro-homeschooling, or at least neutral.
I would offer two thoughts:
1) If we are going to go with quotes in his books that he is pro-homeschooling, then we have to go with quotes in his books that would seem to indicate that he is anti-white, pro terrorist, anti-American, pro "globe", etc. I do not want to go down that road, tbh. Words are free and plentiful. You have to look for the proof in the pudding.
2) However, in absence of actual voting records, you must look at the company one keeps, whom he supports and who supports him. The NEA (national education association) is very much for Obama, and is raising money and support for him, which he accepts. What does the NEA think of homeschooling? "
At its 2007 annual meeting, it approved a resolution calling for tighter regulation of homeschooling: “When home schooling occurs…[i]nstruction should be by persons
who are licensed by the appropriate state education licensure agency, and a curriculum approved by the state department of education should be used.” (National Education Association, “Home Schooling,” Resolution B-75, in “2006–2007 NEA Resolutions,” p. 36, at
www.nea.org/annualmeeting/raaction/images/resolutions2006-2007.pdf (February 1, 2008).)
What does the NEA think of homeschooling parents? According to an article on their website, that we are "well meaning amateurs" and "wannabes" http://www.nea.org/espcolumns/dv040220.html. As well as posting: "Don’t most parents have a tough enough job teaching their children social, disciplinary and behavioral skills? They would be wise to help their children and themselves by leaving the responsibility of teaching math, science, art, writing, history, geography and other subjects to those who are knowledgeable, trained and motivated to do the best job possible.". Who is more motivated than a parent? If parents are supposed to be teaching children social and behavioral skills, and teachers only teach the three R's, then why is the NEA spending so much time on social issues and directing a child's moral compass than figuring out why the USA lags so far behind other countries in math testing?
Ignore that the AVERAGE for homeschoolers on standardized tests is higher than the average for public school students on everything except math computation (higher in math concepts, but lower in computation). Ignore the lack of safety in schools. Ignore the fact that teaching behavior and discipline is much more difficult than teaching math or geography. Ignore the fact that this author said that homeschooling is ok if your child is bedridden or lives in a remote area (is he saying, then, that those children are NOT getting a good education? Or that those parents are "miraculously" able to educate their children, but parents get dumber the closer they live to a public school?). Ignore the fact that homeschoolers are actually exceedingly well adjusted (not the "social misfits" that he claims). Ignore the fact that, except on the rarest of occasions, homeschoolers do not have to worry about being bullied, offered drugs, beat up, shunned for wearing the wrong brand, shot, or stabbed over a cigarette (yes, this happened in my school when I was a senior....the rest of the students had to make a circle around the wounded child to protect him from his attacker--another student. WHERE were the adults? Hmmmm....).
Actually scratch that. Don't ignore any of it. Homeschoolers do have higher average scores. Colleges are starting to seek us out because they recognize that most homeschoolers are self starters. Do not ignore the fact that parents know their child best. Do not ignore the fact that even the most phenomenal, brilliant, engaging teacher does not have the time to educate 28 individual students (who may range from highly gifted to remedial and who each have specific strengths and weaknesses regardless AND who might have variations in sensory abilities and deficits as well as physical and emotional needs and issues) in 50 minutes. Do not ignore the fact that PARENTS outrank TEACHERS when it comes to a parent's child. They are your children, not the teacher's children nor the government's children. Do not ignore the fact that if your child is in school, and there is an event of some sort, the school WILL keep you from your child until they deem it is safe.
Do not ignore testing results
"In 1998, Dr. Lawrence Rudner of the University of Maryland administered academic achievement tests to 20,760 homeschooled students. He reported that “the achievement tests of this group of home school students are exceptionally high—the median scores were typically in the 70th to 80th percentile.” He also found that 25 percent of the homeschooled students tested are enrolled one or more grade levels above their age-level peers in traditional public or private schools." (Lawrence M. Rudner, “Scholastic Achievement and Demographic Characteristics of Home School Students in 1998,”
University of Maryland, March 23, 1999.)
Do not ignore college preparedness:
“The academic performance analyses indicate that home school graduates are as ready for college as traditional high school graduates and that they perform as well on national college assessment tests as traditional high school graduates." (Paul Jones and Gene Gloeckner, “First-Year College Performance: A Study of Home School Graduates and Traditional
School Graduates,” The Journal of College Admissions, Vol. 183 (Spring 2004), pp. 17–20.)
Do not ignore results in life experience after homeschooling:
"In 2003, Dr. Brian Ray of the National Home Education Research
Institute surveyed 7,300 adults (ages 18 through 24) who were homeschooled. Among the respondents, 74 percent had taken college-level courses, compared to 46 percent of the general population. They also reported being involved in their communities and engaged in civic affairs at higher rates than the average population. They were also more likely to report being “happy” than was the general population." (http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/3d/d6/66.pdf)
Do not ignore taxpayer savings (which benefits both taxpayers, and students in public schools)!
"Given the Department of Education’s conservative estimate of 898,000 students20 who were educated entirely at home in 2003, the National Home Education Research Institute’s estimate of 2 million homeschool students, and the national average per pupil expenditure on instruction, homeschooling likely saves American taxpayers and public schools at least $4.4 billion to $9.9 billion in instruction costs each year."(http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/3d/d6/66.pdf
Do not ignore that the NEA wholeheartedly backs and are campaigning for Barack Obama for a reason--they think he is their friend and will support their agenda which includes diversity training for children as young as 5, unlimited exposure to any reading material to students, limiting homeschooling (if not outright banning it). Don't ignore that, if you are a homeschooler, voting for Obama is murky at best in terms of keeping your homeschooling rights.
Just something to consider.
I have looked up Barack Obama's record on homeschooling but have been able to find very little. A few people will point out to a quote or two in his book that seem to indicate that he is pro-homeschooling, or at least neutral.
I would offer two thoughts:
1) If we are going to go with quotes in his books that he is pro-homeschooling, then we have to go with quotes in his books that would seem to indicate that he is anti-white, pro terrorist, anti-American, pro "globe", etc. I do not want to go down that road, tbh. Words are free and plentiful. You have to look for the proof in the pudding.
2) However, in absence of actual voting records, you must look at the company one keeps, whom he supports and who supports him. The NEA (national education association) is very much for Obama, and is raising money and support for him, which he accepts. What does the NEA think of homeschooling? "
At its 2007 annual meeting, it approved a resolution calling for tighter regulation of homeschooling: “When home schooling occurs…[i]nstruction should be by persons
who are licensed by the appropriate state education licensure agency, and a curriculum approved by the state department of education should be used.” (National Education Association, “Home Schooling,” Resolution B-75, in “2006–2007 NEA Resolutions,” p. 36, at
www.nea.org/annualmeeting/raaction/images/resolutions2006-2007.pdf (February 1, 2008).)
What does the NEA think of homeschooling parents? According to an article on their website, that we are "well meaning amateurs" and "wannabes" http://www.nea.org/espcolumns/dv040220.html. As well as posting: "Don’t most parents have a tough enough job teaching their children social, disciplinary and behavioral skills? They would be wise to help their children and themselves by leaving the responsibility of teaching math, science, art, writing, history, geography and other subjects to those who are knowledgeable, trained and motivated to do the best job possible.". Who is more motivated than a parent? If parents are supposed to be teaching children social and behavioral skills, and teachers only teach the three R's, then why is the NEA spending so much time on social issues and directing a child's moral compass than figuring out why the USA lags so far behind other countries in math testing?
Ignore that the AVERAGE for homeschoolers on standardized tests is higher than the average for public school students on everything except math computation (higher in math concepts, but lower in computation). Ignore the lack of safety in schools. Ignore the fact that teaching behavior and discipline is much more difficult than teaching math or geography. Ignore the fact that this author said that homeschooling is ok if your child is bedridden or lives in a remote area (is he saying, then, that those children are NOT getting a good education? Or that those parents are "miraculously" able to educate their children, but parents get dumber the closer they live to a public school?). Ignore the fact that homeschoolers are actually exceedingly well adjusted (not the "social misfits" that he claims). Ignore the fact that, except on the rarest of occasions, homeschoolers do not have to worry about being bullied, offered drugs, beat up, shunned for wearing the wrong brand, shot, or stabbed over a cigarette (yes, this happened in my school when I was a senior....the rest of the students had to make a circle around the wounded child to protect him from his attacker--another student. WHERE were the adults? Hmmmm....).
Actually scratch that. Don't ignore any of it. Homeschoolers do have higher average scores. Colleges are starting to seek us out because they recognize that most homeschoolers are self starters. Do not ignore the fact that parents know their child best. Do not ignore the fact that even the most phenomenal, brilliant, engaging teacher does not have the time to educate 28 individual students (who may range from highly gifted to remedial and who each have specific strengths and weaknesses regardless AND who might have variations in sensory abilities and deficits as well as physical and emotional needs and issues) in 50 minutes. Do not ignore the fact that PARENTS outrank TEACHERS when it comes to a parent's child. They are your children, not the teacher's children nor the government's children. Do not ignore the fact that if your child is in school, and there is an event of some sort, the school WILL keep you from your child until they deem it is safe.
Do not ignore testing results
"In 1998, Dr. Lawrence Rudner of the University of Maryland administered academic achievement tests to 20,760 homeschooled students. He reported that “the achievement tests of this group of home school students are exceptionally high—the median scores were typically in the 70th to 80th percentile.” He also found that 25 percent of the homeschooled students tested are enrolled one or more grade levels above their age-level peers in traditional public or private schools." (Lawrence M. Rudner, “Scholastic Achievement and Demographic Characteristics of Home School Students in 1998,”
University of Maryland, March 23, 1999.)
Do not ignore college preparedness:
“The academic performance analyses indicate that home school graduates are as ready for college as traditional high school graduates and that they perform as well on national college assessment tests as traditional high school graduates." (Paul Jones and Gene Gloeckner, “First-Year College Performance: A Study of Home School Graduates and Traditional
School Graduates,” The Journal of College Admissions, Vol. 183 (Spring 2004), pp. 17–20.)
Do not ignore results in life experience after homeschooling:
"In 2003, Dr. Brian Ray of the National Home Education Research
Institute surveyed 7,300 adults (ages 18 through 24) who were homeschooled. Among the respondents, 74 percent had taken college-level courses, compared to 46 percent of the general population. They also reported being involved in their communities and engaged in civic affairs at higher rates than the average population. They were also more likely to report being “happy” than was the general population." (http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/3d/d6/66.pdf)
Do not ignore taxpayer savings (which benefits both taxpayers, and students in public schools)!
"Given the Department of Education’s conservative estimate of 898,000 students20 who were educated entirely at home in 2003, the National Home Education Research Institute’s estimate of 2 million homeschool students, and the national average per pupil expenditure on instruction, homeschooling likely saves American taxpayers and public schools at least $4.4 billion to $9.9 billion in instruction costs each year."(http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2sql/content_storage_01/0000019b/80/3d/d6/66.pdf
Do not ignore that the NEA wholeheartedly backs and are campaigning for Barack Obama for a reason--they think he is their friend and will support their agenda which includes diversity training for children as young as 5, unlimited exposure to any reading material to students, limiting homeschooling (if not outright banning it). Don't ignore that, if you are a homeschooler, voting for Obama is murky at best in terms of keeping your homeschooling rights.
Just something to consider.
Barack Obama
My beautiful sisters....
I do not want this blog to become too political (not that I do not love talking politics, but I wanted this blog to be more home and spirit).
However, I feel that I must say something about the election, specifically about Barack Obama.
I knew that he was pro choice, but I did not realize how abhorrent his position was.
We have all heard about him saying that he did not want his daughters "punished with a baby" if they became pregnant young (since when is a baby a punishment??). However, I would like to offer something that truly I did not think even he was capable of saying or thinking.
When he was in the Illinois state legislature, there were three pieces of legislation that were brought up to be passed to protect babies who had ALREADY BEEN BORN. Understand that this is not about preventing abortion, this is to protect babies who survived the abortion process and are now living and breathing in the doctor's hands. Up til this legislation, they were left in the soiled linen room, by themselves, to slowly die.
The three bills: SB1093 said if a doctor performing an abortion believed there was a likelihood the baby would survive, another physician must be present "to assess the child's viability and provide medical care." SB1094 gave the parents, or a state-appointed guardian, the right to sue to protect the child's rights. SB1095 simply said a baby alive after "complete expulsion or extraction from its mother" would be considered a " 'person,' 'human being,' 'child' and 'individual.' "
Understand that. The three bills were only for babies who were BORN, that they would be able to get medical care, that the parent could protect the child's rights, and that once a baby is born ALIVE, in whatever manner, it would be considered a person.
Those seem very reasonable. If a baby is born alive, you have to take care of it, and it gets to be declared a human (though at some point I would like to offer why a human is a human scientifically way before birth, but that is another point for another time).
Barack Obama was the ONLY person to vote against these bills. Understand that he was not surrounded by a bunch of conservatives, but also liberals. They all voted for these bills.
Barack Obama instead called theses babies "temporarily alive outside the womb". May I offer that the important point here is OUTSIDE THE WOMB, not "temporarily" (which would be longer if these babies a)were allowed to go to term and b) were given medical care).
Then he also called them a pre-viable fetus. Fetus means IN the womb. They are not pre-viable, they are viable at that moment. They are breathing room air and their heart is beating. They are LIVING right then.
He then said "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or other elements of the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a - a child, a 9-month-old - child that was delivered to term."
Now, understand this! Even if you are not planning an abortion, this bit of mental sleight of hand is IMPORTANT for you if you are going to have a baby! This is saying that if your child is born premature, not through abortion, but through ANY means (induced labor, premature labor, etc) that, if his way of thinking sticks, your child will not be recognized as a human or entitled to any protection!
Oh he meant it just in regards to abortion, I am sure. But since when is a person only a person if someone is not trying to kill them? What does that have to do with anything? You cannot have a premature person born at 22, 26, 30 weeks, but just have a bunch of cells with no rights at 22, 26, 30 weeks. The preemie baby who was born because the doctor was trying to kill him is just as much of a person as the preemie baby who was born due to induced or accidental labor.
Think of what that means when you want health care for the premature child that you gave birth to. According to his thinking, your child is not the same as a child born at term.
He said that this legislation would "I mean, it - it would essentially bar abortions," said Mr. Obama, "because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute." . He would not vote to have a child have protection once it is BORN because he is afraid it would bar abortions. He wants the right to have abortions unencumbered, even if that means that a baby who is breathing, who is moving, is put in a linen room to die, cold and alone and gasping for air. Anyone who has had an asthma attack or has nearly drown knows how excrutiating that is. I cannot imagine the cruelty, and frankly the lack of anthing resembling logic, of a person who would vote against caring for a born baby just so they can protect abortion.
Does this mean I am for McCain? No. I am not sure who I am voting for. It means I am against someone who would torment a baby. It means I am against someone who allows pseudo-intellectual arguments to keep them from seeing that a baby should be protected.
I do not know who I am voting for, but I know who I am NOT voting for.
I do not want this blog to become too political (not that I do not love talking politics, but I wanted this blog to be more home and spirit).
However, I feel that I must say something about the election, specifically about Barack Obama.
I knew that he was pro choice, but I did not realize how abhorrent his position was.
We have all heard about him saying that he did not want his daughters "punished with a baby" if they became pregnant young (since when is a baby a punishment??). However, I would like to offer something that truly I did not think even he was capable of saying or thinking.
When he was in the Illinois state legislature, there were three pieces of legislation that were brought up to be passed to protect babies who had ALREADY BEEN BORN. Understand that this is not about preventing abortion, this is to protect babies who survived the abortion process and are now living and breathing in the doctor's hands. Up til this legislation, they were left in the soiled linen room, by themselves, to slowly die.
The three bills: SB1093 said if a doctor performing an abortion believed there was a likelihood the baby would survive, another physician must be present "to assess the child's viability and provide medical care." SB1094 gave the parents, or a state-appointed guardian, the right to sue to protect the child's rights. SB1095 simply said a baby alive after "complete expulsion or extraction from its mother" would be considered a " 'person,' 'human being,' 'child' and 'individual.' "
Understand that. The three bills were only for babies who were BORN, that they would be able to get medical care, that the parent could protect the child's rights, and that once a baby is born ALIVE, in whatever manner, it would be considered a person.
Those seem very reasonable. If a baby is born alive, you have to take care of it, and it gets to be declared a human (though at some point I would like to offer why a human is a human scientifically way before birth, but that is another point for another time).
Barack Obama was the ONLY person to vote against these bills. Understand that he was not surrounded by a bunch of conservatives, but also liberals. They all voted for these bills.
Barack Obama instead called theses babies "temporarily alive outside the womb". May I offer that the important point here is OUTSIDE THE WOMB, not "temporarily" (which would be longer if these babies a)were allowed to go to term and b) were given medical care).
Then he also called them a pre-viable fetus. Fetus means IN the womb. They are not pre-viable, they are viable at that moment. They are breathing room air and their heart is beating. They are LIVING right then.
He then said "whenever we define a pre-viable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or other elements of the Constitution, what we're really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a - a child, a 9-month-old - child that was delivered to term."
Now, understand this! Even if you are not planning an abortion, this bit of mental sleight of hand is IMPORTANT for you if you are going to have a baby! This is saying that if your child is born premature, not through abortion, but through ANY means (induced labor, premature labor, etc) that, if his way of thinking sticks, your child will not be recognized as a human or entitled to any protection!
Oh he meant it just in regards to abortion, I am sure. But since when is a person only a person if someone is not trying to kill them? What does that have to do with anything? You cannot have a premature person born at 22, 26, 30 weeks, but just have a bunch of cells with no rights at 22, 26, 30 weeks. The preemie baby who was born because the doctor was trying to kill him is just as much of a person as the preemie baby who was born due to induced or accidental labor.
Think of what that means when you want health care for the premature child that you gave birth to. According to his thinking, your child is not the same as a child born at term.
He said that this legislation would "I mean, it - it would essentially bar abortions," said Mr. Obama, "because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute." . He would not vote to have a child have protection once it is BORN because he is afraid it would bar abortions. He wants the right to have abortions unencumbered, even if that means that a baby who is breathing, who is moving, is put in a linen room to die, cold and alone and gasping for air. Anyone who has had an asthma attack or has nearly drown knows how excrutiating that is. I cannot imagine the cruelty, and frankly the lack of anthing resembling logic, of a person who would vote against caring for a born baby just so they can protect abortion.
Does this mean I am for McCain? No. I am not sure who I am voting for. It means I am against someone who would torment a baby. It means I am against someone who allows pseudo-intellectual arguments to keep them from seeing that a baby should be protected.
I do not know who I am voting for, but I know who I am NOT voting for.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
