Musings on motherhood

Women, from all political sides,  get so hostile and defensive whenever modern feminism is challenged.  Most American women have completely bought into modern feminist dogma, ready to do battle for “equal rights” for women in the workplace and “women’s rights” issues, as defined by feminist mouthpieces.  The few women who don’t cling to modern feminist dogma, usually cite fundamental religious beliefs of various stripes as defining their views on marriage and family.

It’s hard to say anything that counters some of the very negative consequences modern feminism has had on children, families, women, men, marriage and male-female relationships.  And most glaringly, it’s taboo to mention the negatives that modern feminism has spawned culturally, because to do so has to mean you’re misogynistic, trying to keep women down, a right-wing zealot, a hater, or just a meanie.

The issue isn’t about women working or staying home, the real issue is how traditional families were grounded in providing a safe, stable environment to rear children.  Absent a stable family, children end up unruly, undisciplined, at risk to all sorts of dangers being unsupervised and unmoored to any values, and totally at prey to the vagaries of pop culture and peer pressure.

People today define their lives in terms of personal happiness, rather than in issues larger than themselves.  That is what I mean, when I refer to the “I” culture.

Above all else Americans are consumed with finding “happiness” and doing whatever makes them “happy”.  America was grounded in a belief in individual liberty, but the “pursuit of happiness”, that most Americans believe means that they are free to do whatever they want, is not what the clause “pursuit of happiness” really means.

James R. Rogers, department head and associate professor of political science at Texas A&M, writes:

““Happiness” in the public discourse of the time often did not simply refer to a subjective emotional state. It meant prosperity or, perhaps better, well-being in the broader sense. It included the right to meet physical needs, but it also included a significant moral and religious dimension. In correspondence between James Madison and James Monroe in 1786, Madison notes that “happiness” cannot simply be identified with meeting people’s interests, but includes a higher reference:

There is no maxim in my opinion which is more liable to be misapplied, and which therefore needs elucidation, than the current one that the interest of the majority is the political standard of right and wrong. Taking the word “interest” as synonymous with “ultimate happiness,” in which sense it is qualified with every necessary moral ingredient, the proposition is no doubt true. But taking it in its popular sense, as referring to the immediate augmentation of property and wealth, nothing can be more false.”

https://www.firstthings.com/web-exclusives/2012/06/the-meaning-of-the-pursuit-of-happiness

While assuredly, women, just as men should follow their dreams and pursue whatever careers they choose, when one becomes a “parent”, personal happiness must take a backseat to duty to your child.  This sense of duty has become very muddled by modern feminist dogma, where at every turn, there is a promotion of government-funding of childcare, devaluation of mothers who stay-at-home to care for their children and relentless glorification of “women-who-have-it-all”.

The complete devaluation of stay-at-home mothers has led to many women who are stay-at-home moms to not take their duties seriously and to put little real effort into rearing their children.  In turn, many (perhaps even most) men do not take stay-at-home mothering as a serious undertaking.  Instead, many men will respect career women, but disparage stay-at-mothering and equate it to sitting at home watching soap operas.  Modern feminists have worked diligently to promote this image of stay-at-home mothering, as not worthy of respect or dedication.

If you want to be completely discounted as someone worth listening to, be a homemaker. Hardly anyone takes homemakers seriously, even most homemakers themselves, where most of them feel compelled to list other things they do besides caring for their family, that their situation as a homemaker is just temporary, or that they are engaged in some other activities pursuing a career.

Devotion to taking care of your children and home, as serious work, should be promoted as real work and worthy of dedication.  This applies to stay-at-home mothers and to working mothers.

That taking care of  your children and creating a stable home environment should come before your own “happiness”, escapes many men and women today.  The concept of  duty to your children, as the preeminent responsibility as a parent doesn’t even register with many parents and in our consumer-focused culture, the fixation on buying children more “stuff” substitutes for meaningful dedication to teaching children values and manners.

The fact that many mothers don’t really define their primary duty as caring for their children, but rather in terms of career and personal happiness speaks to the success of modern feminism at working systematically to destroy traditional family structure.  It is as much a “long march through the institutions” as communism and other progressive ideologies.  All of them strive to tear down western civilization and replace it with their socialistic utopias (nanny state solutions), under the guise of people being “happy”.

It’s all about breaking through “glass ceilings” and cheering on the “first woman” to achieve another career milestone. Sure, it’s nice that women can pursue whatever careers they choose, but biological reality has not changed and neither has the real necessity that children require devoted, dutiful parents to place caring and nurturing them to adulthood, as the single most important duty of their life.

This isn’t about choosing either a career or staying at home, it’s about that however mothers manage their lives, dutifully caring for their children should be the top priority, not their own  “happiness”.

Motherhood is the most important job you will ever have.  Take it seriously.

2 Comments

Filed under Culture Wars, General Interest

The crafting side of LB…

Decorating dilemma with my hearth.  On the left side of my hearth, I had pot with a snake plant in it, but the snake plant bit the dust.  One of my dogs started grabbing mouthfuls of the dirt and spreading it around the living room, so I decided to use an old basket my sister had decorated long ago and some old Walmart clearance silk flowers I had.  Color combos aren’t my strong suit and I don’t know anything about flower arranging, but I like how it turned out.

I am trying to use some of the craft and sewing clearance junk I bought at Walmart, while working there. The way it worked with me is, we’d have some merchandise go on clearance and it didn’t sell right away. Then my co-workers would tell me how crafty I was and suggest that I could find some use for it.  Upon which I would start thinking of craft and sewing projects using that “stuff” and before I knew it, I bought it.

With all the closets in my house full, I’m now in the mindful stage of hoarding, which is recognizing my bad shopping habits and focusing instead on trying to find creative ways to use some of the stuff I already have. Yes, I am shopping my own house first, before buying more craft or sewing stuff.

Have a nice day:-)

Leave a comment

Filed under General Interest

The LB “Huma” blog posts

I’m just going to provide the titles and links to a few more LB blog posts:

October 29, 2016:  Does “C” lead to espionage or just more pay-to-play?

October 30, 2016:   Hillary’s Indispensable Girl Friday

October 31, 2016:  More worrying bits of information

November 1, 2016:  Questions about Huma

November 1, 2016:  Repeating Abedin Facts

November 2, 2016:  About Huma Abedin

Leave a comment

Filed under Corrupt Media Collusion, General Interest, Hillary's Email Scandal, Politics, Public Corruption

Who was there? ( blog repost from September 6, 2016)

Next up:

Who was there???

wp-1473174957055.jpg

Above is the first paragraph of the FBI Interview Notes.  It lists Hillary Clinton’s attorneys present for this interview.  One name is redacted and one can only wonder why?

On July 2, 2016, the New York Times reported:

Accompanying Mrs. Clinton into the meeting were her lawyer David E. Kendall; Cheryl D. Mills and Heather Samuelson, longtime aides who are also lawyers; and two lawyers from Mr. Kendall’s firm, Williams & Connolly, Katherine Turner and Amy Saharia.

Eight officials from the F.B.I. and the Department of Justice conducted the interview, according to a person who was familiar with the substance of the session but declined to be named because the meeting was private. This person characterized the meeting as “civil” and “businesslike.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/03/us/politics/hillary-clinton-fbi-emails.html?_r=1

So, was the other attorney Amy Saharia, as the New York Times reported back in July, or was it someone else?  Why on earth redact the name, if it was Saharia???

There are several redactions on who was present from the DOJ.  The FBI Notes list two people from the DOJ/FBI side and have three names redacted, which comes to 5 names, although the NY Times story says there were 8 DOJ/FBI people present, so who are 3 redacted names + 3 others mentioned in the NY Times story???   Even if that one long block of redaction, after David Laufman’s name is more than one name, we are still left with knowing only 2 names of who was present from the FBI/DOJ and leaves SIX unknowns. Something is very wrong when you compare the NY Times report to the FBI Notes.

Andrew McCarthy and others have explained why Cheryl Mills should not have been present.  McCarthy writes:

“Readers may recall that I suggested back in May that “the fix” was in in the investigation of the Clinton emails. The reason was that the Justice Department was allowing Cheryl Mills – a witness, if not a subject, of the investigation – to invoke attorney-client privilege on behalf of Mrs. Clinton in order to thwart the FBI’s attempt to inquire into the procedure used to produce Clinton’s emails to the State Department. Mills was a participant in that procedure – and it is the procedure in which, we now know, well over 30,000 emails were attempted to be destroyed, including several thousand that contained government-related business.

When she worked for Clinton at State, Mills was not acting in the capacity of a lawyer – not for then-Secretary Clinton and not for the State Department. Moreover, as Clinton’s chief-of-staff, Mills was intimately involved in issues related to Clinton’s private email set up, the discussions about getting her a secure BlackBerry similar to President Obama’s, and questions that were raised (including in FOIA requests) about Clinton’s communications.

That is to say, Mills was an actor in the facts that were under criminal investigation by the FBI. Put aside that she was not Mrs. Clinton’s lawyer while working for the State Department; as I explained in the May column, Mills, after leaving the State Department, was barred by ethical rules from acting as Mrs. Clinton’s lawyer “in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially as a public officer or employee.”

There is no way Mills should have been permitted to participate as a lawyer in the process of producing Clinton’s emails to the State Department nearly two years after they’d both left. I thought it was astonishing that the Justice Department indulged her attorney-client privilege claim, which frustrated the FBI’s ability to question her on a key aspect of the investigation. But it is simply unbelievable to find her turning up at Mrs. Clinton’s interview – participating in the capacity of a lawyer under circumstances where Clinton was being investigated over matters in which Mills participated as a non-lawyer government official.

According to the FBI’s report, Mrs. Clinton had four other attorneys (one whose name is deleted from the report for some reason) representing her at the interview. She clearly did not need another lawyer. And it is Criminal Investigations 101 that law enforcement never interviews witnesses together – the point is to learn the truth, not provide witnesses/suspects with an opportunity to keep their story straight, which undermines the search for truth. Why on earth was Cheryl Mills permitted to sit in on Hillary Clinton’s FBI interview?

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/439676/clintons-fbi-interview-what-was-cheryl-mills-doing-there

Something smells very wrong here.  I wonder if perhaps Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch were present to oversee this interview and assure it led nowhere?  Would that even be possible?

We deserve an answer as to who all was present for this kangaroo proceeding!!!

And lest we forget, James Comey folded his cards on an indictment on July 5, 2016, as President Obama was en route to a campaign stop in Charlotte, NC, with Hillary on board Air Force One with him.


Afterthought:

Perhaps the FBI Notes release is a SOS from the FBI to let the American people know the rule of law has been hijacked by the Clintons and Obama.

Leave a comment

Filed under General Interest, Hillary's Email Scandal, Politics, Public Corruption

The Comey “tell” ( blog repost from July 10, 2016)

From last year, first up:

The Comey “tell”

“A tell in poker is a subtle but detectable change in a player’s behavior or demeanor that gives clues to that player’s assessment of his hand. A player gains an advantage if he observes and understands the meaning of another player’s tell, particularly if the tell is unconscious and reliable. Sometimes a player may fake a tell, hoping to induce his opponents to make poor judgments in response to the false tell.”

http://poker.wikia.com/wiki/Tell_%28poker%29

I’ve been thinking back over FBI Director, James Comey’s testimony before Congress last Thursday and once again the sequence of events leaves me pondering something he said, that struck me as a “tell”.

First the sequence of events:

In April, President Obama made a statement saying that Hillary’s behavior was not criminal and that national security had not been compromised.  He also stated, per the LA Times:

“What I’ve also said is that — and she has acknowledged — that there’s a carelessness, in terms of managing emails, that she … recognizes,” he added. He added that she did an “outstanding job” as America’s top diplomat.” (my emphasis)

http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-obama-clinton-20160410-story.html

The week before Comey announced his  “recommendation”, President Obama had arranged to campaign with Hillary Clinton, in fact, they were on Air Force One heading to a campaign event, when Comey gave his public announcement.

That same week, Attorney General, Loretta Lynch, had a clandestine meeting with former President Bill Clinton on her plane at the airport in Phoenix, AZ.  Lynch came out and proclaimed it was all just an innocent meeting, where they talked about grandchildren, their travels and BREXIT.  She acted contrite and admitted it was a mistake.

Then on July 1, 2016, Loretta Lynch  announced she won’t recuse herself, but she will abide by the FBI recommendation.

Saturday, July, 2, 2016, Hillary met with the FBI for 3.5 hours.  Judging by subsequent events, they might have discussed the grandchildren and her yoga routines, because the FBI did not videotape or transcribe their chat.  “Interview” seems too professional of a term for this charade.

Last week, on July 5, 2016, James Comey made his surprise announcement and did not recommend an indictment.

Republican heads exploded, after Comey laid out the laundry list of conduct that Hillary Clinton and her top aides engaged in, that read like a very damning list of charges in an indictment, but at the last minute he blithely brushed it all aside as “extremely careless“, but despite that,  he argued against  an indictment. He stated that no reasonable prosecutor would indict.  He gave the Clintons what was demanded, I firmly believe.

Last Thursday, July 7, 2016, Comey testified before Congress and without rehashing the legalities, it’s the one incongruent comment he made that struck me, as if he was unintentionally telling us something.  He seemed pained and almost embarrassed by some of his tortured explanations to explain how “extremely careless” differs from “grossly negligent”.  He went to great lengths about how Hillary’s celebrity requires that she be treated “fairly”.  She was NOT a celebrity, she was one of our nation’s highest-level government officials and she grossly violated that trust.  Government officials,  in whom great trust is placed, should be held to the highest standards – not treated like a “celebrity”.  All the Democrats shameless pandering to him and lauding his integrity seemed to make him uncomfortable.

The tell was when Comey testified that he cares most about his family and his reputation. When he said that, I thought it odd, when what he should be most concerned about is protecting and defending The Constitution. His testimony seemed to me  a desperate self-preservation effort to salvage his reputation (and protect his family), which he completely compromised with falling in line with the Clinton “talking points”.  When you submit to the Clinton intimidation, they own you.  With all the Bill Clinton strong-arm tactics employed to clear the path to the White House for Hillary, everyone whom Bill Clinton has pressured, from Obama through Loretta Lynch, Comey was hailed as the exemplar of integrity.  I believe Bill Clinton’s enforcers let Comey know they have some very personal dirt on him that would hurt his family and his reputation.  The Clinton sewer rats, as I’ve said many times, operate like the old KGB.  If there’s any dirt, they will find it.  There is no sewer too vile for them to scurry through.  The Clintons are not only above the law, but a law unto themselves.

Friday, July, 6 2016, Loretta Lynch came out and followed the talking points to the letter – she announced that she accepted the FBI recommendation.

Time to move on…   

Leave a comment

Filed under General Interest, Hillary's Email Scandal, Politics, Public Corruption

A Comey Retrospective

The pundits and DC media zoomed into overdrive on divining the “real” reasons President Trump fired FBI director, James Comey yesterday.  I still don’t have a working theory of what motivated President Trump or if the reasons the administration cited are the real reasons.

I do know that James Comey, at critical points in the Hillary Clinton campaign, went public and did damage control for her with her home-brew email server scandal.  As of his time testifying to Congress the other day, he was still selling the “intent” line about why Huma Abedin broke no laws.  There is no “intent” provision is the law pertaining to handling of classified information.  If you mishandle it for any reason, that is a crime.

When Comey reopened the investigation, days before the 2016 election, he did so under pressure from FBI officials, who brought serious information to him.  However, as quickly as possible and as the leaks were mounting on numerous more investigations, ongoing in several states, into the Clinton Foundation corruption, Comey went public and buried the investigation AGAIN.   Once again, it was Comey with “nothing to see here”.  The media buried mentioning any of those ongoing criminal investigations and assuredly they weren’t investigating them.

I’m going to repost a few old LB posts from last year.  There was something hokey about Hillary’s FBI interview on the Saturday of a 4th of July weekend, when hardly anyone was around.  There was one lawyer’s name redacted in those FBI Notes, which were released in September 2016.  It made no sense.

There are a lot of things about how Comey did damage control for Hillary Clinton, that make no sense.  I believe he was rolled by the Clinton or Obama political machines, or maybe, BOTH.

Leave a comment

Filed under Corrupt Media Collusion, General Interest, Hillary's Email Scandal, Politics, Public Corruption, The Media

Just a few photos

Worked a little in my front flower bed.  My bird bath is supposed to be the home to a fairy house, but I haven’t made one yet, so it’s just flowers again.  This year I’m trying a bed of drainage rocks and planting the flowers in a coco basket liner, rather than planting them directly into the bird bath.   A lot of rain water collects in the bottom of the bird bath and I have to tip it to drain water all the time, so now I can easily remove the flowers and tip it.  Considered drilling drainage holes in the bottom of the bird bath.  I know how to use a drill and we have masonry bits, but not sure if this would require a hammer drill.  So, I don’t want to crack my bird bath trying to drill with the regular drill and I don’t want to buy a hammer drill for what is basically flower pot drainage.  Opted for trying the drainage rocks, which were under $4 for a bag.  I can use the rest of this bag of drainage rocks in the bottom of flower pots, because I put a layer of rocks or broken up pieces of old clay flower pots in the bottom of my flower pots for drainage.

wp-1494349290651.jpg

Finished… better than the previous efforts, but still need more practice.

wp-1494374039101.jpg

Went simple with the crazy birds finish.  Probably after finishing another dozen small cross-stitch projects, mine will look much better.  That’s how I learn everything – lots of practice.  And geesh, my youngest daughter explained how to turn the flash on with the camera on my cell phone and that sure improved my photos too, lol.

Comey was fired… no comment yet.

My blog will be back to politics in the next post.

Leave a comment

Filed under General Interest, Uncategorized

The Men

Fitting with the family topic, here’s a really interesting article at National Review:

The Revival of American Masculinity Starts at Home

This fits in with a theme covered in several previous LB posts:

Gimme a knife, an essay by my friend, Gladius Maximus

Survival: the Mind-set

Where have all the real men gone?

Gentlemen: America’s endangered species

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Culture Wars

Dutiful women and needlework

NormaFrableMy mother, as a young nurse.

The post I wrote about basics,  practice and self-discipline brought to mind many things.  First, I’d like to explain that Rose Wilder Lane was a self-made woman.  She was the daughter of Laura Ingalls Wilder and it was through Lane’s very successful journalism career, that the Little House books were published.  Rose Wilder Lane grew up in poverty, where her parents moved several times as their farms failed.  Lane taught herself several languages and journalism.  She became one of the highest paid journalists in the 1920s and was also a successful editor and novelist.

When Rose Wilder Lane was younger she dabbled in supporting Communist ideology, which was common among journalists and the American left when the Russian revolution was thought to be the advent of great freedom for the Russian people.  Lane later rejected Communism and became a prominent figure in the American libertarian movement.  Regardless of your political views, Rose Wilder Lane is one of the most fascinating women of the 20th century – a truly remarkable woman.   Her needlework book I mentioned is a very interesting read.  Woman’s Day commissioned her to write their Book of American Needlework, because not only was Lane a famous journalist, novelist and historical writer, she was an expert needlewoman.  Her book, The Discovery of Freedom, is another truly amazing read too, no matter where you fall on the political scale.  The Mises Institute offers it free: Here.

I love counted cross-stitch and various types of decorative needlework.  Thinking about needlework basics made me think of my mother.  My parents had 7 children and my older brother died in infancy several years before I was born in 1960.  My father did road construction and my mother was a registered nurse, who always worked.

My mother grew up in poverty too.

My mother kept our house immaculate and was a superb cook and baker.  We had a garden and my mother canned a lot of vegetables in the summer.

In previous posts, I mentioned that my mother was very good at fixing things and she was good at electrical wiring too.  My mother loved crewel embroidery and she did lovely beadwork on satin for several ringbearer pillows that she did for people. However, I only recall a few crewel pieces that my mother did, because although my mother loved decorative needlework, she had six kids and she dedicated many hours to and was an expert at mending our clothes.  She also was an expert at stain-removal and laundry.  Every piece of clothes she washed was folded neatly and put away.  She ironed a lot of stuff, then taught us how to iron.  I loved doing laundry, especially hanging the clothes outside on the line and I loved ironing as a kid.

I took time to myself and did decorative needlework, despite having four kids and being a stay-at-home Mom.  I also hate mending clothes and did very little of it.  When my mother would come visit, she would gather up all my kids’ clothes that needed mending and patiently sit and repair it.  The reason I am not good at “finishes”, turning finished cross-stitch pieces into decorative pillows and wallhangings, etc., is finishes require other stitching and I never took the time to learn practical stitches, unless I felt like it.  So, I now need practice at simple stuff, like ladder-stitch, because when I was younger I would have just whip-stitched small stuff closed.  I was only interested in decorative stitches.

My mother also assigned chores that my brothers and sisters and I had to do.  When I had children, my mother constantly told me that I needed to make my kids help clean and do more around the house.  I was very lenient with them on chores or even cleaning their rooms.  I also am not as disciplined as my mother was in running a well-ordered home.

My mother was the hardest working woman I have ever known.  We would tell her to get more rest, because often she would work the 3pm to 11 pm shift at the hospital and then come home and spend most of the night doing housework.  Without fail, she would be up early in the morning and work in the house until it was time to go to the hospital at 3pm.  One of her favorite sayings was, “I’ll have plenty of time to sleep when I’m dead.”

My mother wore an old red sweater in the winter time to shovel snow or carry the ash buckets outside from the cellar. Our house had a coal furnace that required manual labor to shovel coal into it and my mother shoveled a lot of coal to keep our house warm in the winter and to heat hot water year-round.  She mended that red sweater over and over through the years.

When my mother passed away, my sisters in PA, took her old red sweater to the funeral home and had it placed in the corner of her casket.  My mother never bought a lot of clothes, but she kept everything she owned in pristine condition. Whenever I sit and do needlework, I think about my mother’s old red sweater and now that I am getting older, I think about how I didn’t even take the time to mend my kids’ clothes, because I hate mending clothes.

Mending clothes reflects a virtue – it is a belief that you should not be wasteful and that you should take care of your clothing and keep it serviceable for as long as possible.  We became a disposable culture and it shows in how we do everything, not just in regards to how we care for our clothing.  We became an “I” culture, fixated on self-indulgence above all else.  This buying more and more “stuff”, without even using most of the “stuff” we already have is another symptom of this wasteful culture.  It is corrupting the moral fiber of the American people.  We are the most wasteful and self-indulgent people on earth.

Most of the needlework I have done has been for gifts,  although there are a few pieces I’ve kept for myself.  I’m trying to learn to finish small pieces, so I can give nicer gifts to my friends and family.

Someday, I hope that I might develop as selfless and good character as my mother, who put other people before herself, at home and at work, always, but I doubt that I can be as dutiful to caring for others as my mother was.

1 Comment

Filed under American Character, General Interest

Stitching “smalls” practice

Bought a $2 unfinished craft frame at Dollar General.  Stained it with my brown scrapbook ink. Had the buttons and fabric.

I’m still trying to use up scraps of Aida cross-stitch fabric as practice learning how to finish small cross-stitch pieces into something…  The top pattern was a free pattern online.  The bottom two, well, I spaced them close together thinking I would do 4 of these small, Walmart Easter clearance kits together.  I bought these kits years ago.  While stitching the bunny, I dreaded the thought of 2 more of these tedious kits.  The lamb will be tricky finishing, since I have very little space along the bottom,

Here are the other 2 kits I was going to put with them.

Another free pattern, this one from a German website.  Still need to finish stuffing this and stitch it closed, then trim it.

Free pattern from Snowflower Diaries, a Hungarian designer’s website.  Stitched this for my oldest daughter, whose birthday is at the end of May.

I think this free pattern was from a French website and tentatively thinking about this fabric and trim, that I had.

wp-1491906640020.jpg

A free pattern, not perfect stitching on the bottom and I added a button on the white ric rac trim, before giving it to a dear friend.

Stitched this from an old cross-stitch calendar, I had.  It’s just one motif in a sampler, I pulled.  It’s about 4″X4″.  When I sent a picture to my youngest daughter, she suggested I change the corner flowers to blue or put some sort of blue border around it.  I’m thinking about maybe making cording using the blue and white embroidery floss instead.

Oh, yeah and Comey testified in front of Congress…  Still following the DC soap opera too.

1 Comment

Filed under General Interest