Thursday, July 06, 2006

The Loss of a Child





There are many children's graves in the Round Rock Cemetery. Losing a child or two was to be expected in most families before the availability of antibiotics. I wish I could find the sad little series of graves I found so many years ago. I think there were four babies' graves, and the last headstone was for mother and baby, both. I need a cool, dry day to find them, though. It's a large cemetery and it has been a very long time since I saw them. 25 years, maybe.

These stones caught my eye--the twins that died three weeks apart. I can imagine the desperation of the parents, trying to keep the second one alive. I wonder what killed them. Could have been anything, I suppose--measles, typhoid, cholera, flu. Being twins, they were probably small at birth, and maybe premature, as well. Poor little things. And the stone that has hand incised, "Baby" with a surname. Died without ever having a name. The little fallen stone belongs to the grave of a child who lived about a year.

So very sad.

75 comments:

  1. That's so sad, Ronni. This entry and the photos really grabbed at my heart.

    Those were certainly hard times made even more difficult by such loss.

    I can't imagine going through such hardships and loss in a time when counseling was unheard of.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Apparently, I made my pregnant daughter cry with this entry. I didn't know she read this.

    Sorry, Vanessa and Nadine! I found it sad, but just thought I was thin-skinned!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Did you think it was sad that Shina's baby died? Or, like your friend Loretta, did you also think he was he better off dead than with a mother like her? Just askin'

    ReplyDelete
  4. If you come with a name, anonymous, I'll answer you.

    ReplyDelete
  5. No thanks. But your entry begs the question. I'm not willing to sacrifice my anonymity for more mealie mouth excuses.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If you are so sure you know the answer, then why ask the question?

    You might be surprised!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I was hoping you would see the irony of having such compassion for dead babies and mothers in a cemetary, but no disapproval of a "friend" who says hateful, wicked things about the deceased child of a living mother. No disconnect there huh. Silly me.

    Telling me to out myself before you will answer is a bully tactic that suggests I am right... I would not be surprised at your answer.

    You could show me wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Ms anonymous, I am no more responsible for what anyone else says than you are.

    I am tired of your bullying challenges, and to accuse me of bully tactics because I want you to identify yourself is just silly.

    You know who I am; why not afford me the same courtesy?

    And, think before you answer, because there are people reading here who do not even know who Loretta is and have no dog in this fight.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Good for you, you IP sleuth you. And yes, forcibly outing people is bullying. If you didn't want your entries remarked upon by anonymous posters, you should not allow anonymous comments. To allow it, and then publish an IP when you don't want to answer a question, that's bullying, imo.

    And no, you're not responsible for what anyone else says. But you are responsible for how you react to them. Do bigoted or racist remarks offend you? Do you say so? Do you remain friends & confidantes with bigoted and racist people? That's no different from not condemning those "baby" remarks (and other hateful comments) and continuing to support the person who wrote them. Silence = complicity.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I have no problem talking to people with names.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Shina had been spreading despicable lies about Loretta at the time Loretta made that comment. It was made in anger. I have no idea if she still feels that way.

    None of us knew that Samantha was Shina, or that she had lost a baby, until the lies started about the photoshopped picture. Remember those lies? Did any one of you ever say, "Let me see the picture before I pass judgement?"

    Nope.

    The belief in the existance of that picture, without any evidence, was universal amongst you.

    You hide behind your anonymity and say, "It wasn't me, it was some other anonymous," and yet have the colossal nerve to come here and castigate me for sticking by a friend even when I don't necessarily agree with each and every utterance from her keyboard.

    There is only one person I ever agree with wholeheartedly on every subject, and that's myself. And my POV and attitude can change on a given subject from time to time.

    ReplyDelete
  13. And you have no bloody right to try and tell me how to run MY comments on MY blog.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I love it when the anonys whine about not standing up to Loretta all the while letting stand all the BS lies about Loretta they swallow without question from their fellow muttslimes.

    They don't even have the balls to stand up for a murdered child thrown from a cliff!

    ReplyDelete
  15. for all intents and purposes, none of us really knows if Shina's baby ever existed.

    We certainly know that 'picture' never existed.

    As far as I'm concerned, the adoption of the nephew/niece thing never existed, either.

    Here we have a fantasy person posting under a fantasy name, giving out fantasy information in both her fake and real identities, and then expecting sympathy when the fantasy is exposed?

    People like that do not make competent parents.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Balls? Smalls! That one didn't even have the fortitude to stand up to me.

    ~I'm so formidable, doncha know~

    I think they're a bunch of neutered mutts, myself!

    From reading the transcripts, it's easy to see why Pattycake fits right in over there!

    ReplyDelete
  17. Excellent point, Countrygirl.

    It's the Mob Mentality, which is painfully apparent when they all use "Anonymous" to post, and then expect to be take seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I agree with that statement, Loretta, however, I assume that the loss of her child could have sent Shina into hiding and allowed Samantha to emerge from the depths of her divided little mind.

    I mean...her favourite authors are Danielle Steele and LaVyrie Spenser!

    ~puhleeeeeeeze~

    ReplyDelete
  19. I put up her sitemeter info for a little while.

    Just to show her that anonymity is ephemeral.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Frankly, I don't believe much of anything Shina/Samantha writes on her blog or says to people in various configurations.

    And, I don't really care.

    Nobody in Muttville has any credibility. Nobody knows who they really are, really look like, really do in real life, nothing.

    In real life we all know who and what we are. None of us who are together from my blog has any "secret" identity.

    It's always been what you see is what you get.

    I can't wait to meet more of you soon at the big fiesta.

    ReplyDelete
  21. That "her" was my visiting annonny, not Shina.

    It wasn't Shina.

    ReplyDelete
  22. It's not only that, Loretta, it's that whingeing about old comments is SO last year!

    Get a grip, anonymous. We have moved on.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Well, you either allow anonymous comments or you don't. I thought you didn't care about IPs and such.

    In your comments, you did not surprise me after all. I don't care if L was mad at "Samantha" or not. It was a disgusting, dispicable, unthinkably horrid thing to say. About anyone. No matter what. Your excuses are really lame. "She was mad", "I don't know if she still feels that way", "I don't agree with everything she says", blah blah blah. Nothing but weak excuses for a decripit, black soul in someone you call "friend".

    As far as the photoshop accusation goes, I'm not talking about that, or defending that, am I? I am judging what Loretta SAID. Black and white. No ambiguity about it. And it's fitting with everything else she has said about the people of NO, parents of murdered children, Katie's sister, and the list goes on and on.

    Your moral compass needs calibrating because it just swings in the wind. And Loretta provides "the breeze".

    ReplyDelete
  24. Oh, and thanks for taking the IP info down.

    ReplyDelete
  25. I'm looking forward to the fiesta, as well!

    Misfits should turn 29 every year!

    ReplyDelete
  26. CG, if I wanted to talk about the Cam Brown trial, there are plenty of other places, including your new blog, where I could go. But I don't. Ronni's post about the poor little babies that died prompted me to point out a glaring and obvious irony.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Who let the dogs out??

    Woof! Woof!

    ReplyDelete
  28. You coddle a woman who made a 4 year old girl's life miserable and is married to her killer. Go track your dog poop back to your own house.

    ReplyDelete
  29. LOL, anonymous!

    If my "moral compass" were lacking in anything, I would have left that up there!

    Opinions are allowed.

    I am even allowing yours, for the present.

    Even though you are saying the same old boring stuff you've been prating for months in other forums.

    My friends do not have "black souls."

    All those statements and opinions to which you refer have been blown way out of proportion by people with nothing better to do.

    Tell me, are you one of those anonymous's that defends Cam Brown? We have no restrictions here about discussing that case.

    We have moved on. You should, too.

    ReplyDelete
  30. And there is no irony here. I am entitled to my own opinions, as are you, Loretta, CG, Nadine, Shina and all of us.

    Which of our founding fathers was it who said something to the effect of, "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it?"

    ReplyDelete
  31. Perhaps a definition of "irony" is in order:

    "1) a method of humorous or sarcastic expression in which the intended meaning of the words used is the direct opposite of their usual sense: as, the speaker was using irony when he said the stupid plan was "very clever."
    2) an instance of this.
    3) a combination of circumstances or a result that is the opposite of what might be expected or considered appropriate: as, it was an irony of fate that the fireboat burned and sank.
    4) the feigning of ignorance in argument; more frequently Socratic irony (after Socrates, who used this device in Plato's 'Dialogues')."

    ~from Webster's New Twentieth Century Dictionary, Unabridged

    ReplyDelete
  32. Taking down the IP post tells me you hold yourself to a higher moral standard than what you expect from your "friends". That points to a kind of moralistic relativism that I can't condone. But thanks anyway.

    And, really, the mutt shtick is getting old too.

    Moving on now... Have a great day.

    ReplyDelete
  33. ...hello...?
    ...anonymous...?
    Where did you go?

    ReplyDelete
  34. i·ro·ny ( P ) Pronunciation Key (r-n, r-)
    n. pl. i·ro·nies

    The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning.
    An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning.
    A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect. See Synonyms at wit1.

    Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: “Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated” (Richard Kain).
    An occurrence, result, or circumstance notable for such incongruity. See Usage Note at ironic.
    Dramatic irony.
    Socratic irony.

    Source: The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition
    Copyright © 2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company.
    Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

    My usage was correct and shows that if you have such sentiment and empathy for deceased babies in a cemetary, you would also be expected to have the same for another baby (of this century) who died. It is ironic (incongruous) that you would find one circumstance so sad, and not another.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I have never ONCE said that I was not saddened by Shina's loss.

    If I had heard about it before the endless vile spamming, lying and cursing visited upon Loretta and the rest of us by Samantha, I might have cut her some slack.

    But, after all that, I am willing to cut Loretta some slack.

    ReplyDelete
  36. I assure you that my friends have no lack of morals.

    I daresay the "mutt schtick" IS getting old. So is the "scum of NO" schtick, the "substance abuse" schtick, the "Lowrenta" schtick, the "vero the zero" schtick, the copying and pasting of comments back to 2003 schtick, the "borderline personality disorder" schtick, the "child neglect" schtick, and all the other garbage that is nothing but lies and out-of-context exaggeration.

    Get used to it.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Of course you would cut her some slack. Like I said, no surprises. Now I really have to go.

    ReplyDelete
  38. And you will cut huge swathes of slack to anyone else but Loretta and the rest of us. To the point of believing, or appearing to believe, any libel or defamation you hear spouted in your smelly little kennel.

    ReplyDelete
  39. OK, I have a little more time ;-).

    I have never defamed anyone. I do not believe *everything* that has ever been said on the LH blog (or its predecessors), and I do not make excuses for some of the more outrageous claims (few that there are).

    You see, there is very little chaff in that wheat. *Most* of what is said there is ALL TRUE, written by Loretta's very own self. She has created a LONG history of gaffes and insults and offenses that she can't deny, rationalize, run away from, or spin to her self-aggrandizement any longer. You can't do that and not expect to collect ideological detractors and personal enemies.

    And what about that crazy 9/11 crap? It's nutz, I tell you.

    Very few people (when it was once hundreds, or so she would have us believe) think she has any credibility or relevance anymore. There is a *reason* for that, and it's not "the kennel."

    Nope, no huge swathes of slack are cut by me. I call 'em as I see 'em. 'Mutt' or 'monkey' -- my standards are the same.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Loretta has made comments that are tame when compared with those made by many other bloggers, both famous (Ann Coulter, etc.), and otherwise--spend a few hours sometime hitting "next blog" up in the corner, and see what you find. What about that "Vox Populi" over at Usenet? And all the other racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic misanthropes over there?

    She has said nothing even close to their rantings.

    And the libel in the kennel goes far beyond anything she ever said.

    Crack. Didn't happen. She may have used cocaine a few times, back in the day, but alcohol was her drug of choice. And being sober for over 12 years seems to me to be an admirable thing, not something to bash someone for.

    Child neglect. Not happening. I've met N. That is not a neglected and/or abused child.

    No cardboard furniture.

    No section 8 housing.

    No photoshopped picture of Shina's baby.

    She did put daughters through college.

    She does play the flute. Well, I may add.

    And her 9/11 theories are shared by a lot of people with more experience and education than all of us put together.

    ReplyDelete
  41. If you really want a cause to fight for, join the guys who are taking on NAMBLA. Expend your energy doing something USEFUL, instead of ragging on a single mom blogger in Cleveland, for heaven's sake!

    ReplyDelete
  42. I feel like Don Quixote, tilting at the windmill!

    ReplyDelete
  43. Stop deflecting. I am only discussing Loretta's Internet presence. I'm not talking about her using days, or her kids, or her flute, or her furniture or her housing. I am not discussing Ann Coulter (though her comments about the 9/11 widows are also repugnant), nor Vox whatever, nor any of the other flakes and freaks on Usenet. I don't go there. And I don't need your patronizing suggestions for other "causes" I might take up.

    Had Loretta not betrayed and attacked people so viciously and personally, I would not have a thing to say about this mean-spirited person who is given to espousing wild conspiracy theories and who has an advanced-stage superiority complex. No, she would not interest me in the least. But it is SHE who made it personal, it is SHE who seeks the attention. And now she wants to be left alone? Now she's just a "single mom blogger in Cleveland"? GMAFB.

    ReplyDelete
  44. I am merely trying to understand why you go after her when there are so many others out there who are so much more outrageous.

    Why her?

    Betrayed? Attacked?

    Please!

    She hurt a few people's feelings! She put up some snippets of info that she admits she shouldn't have!

    So what?

    The things the denizens of the Slough of Despond have said about her and done to her go so far beyond that, that they are not even in the same time zone!

    A map to her child's school, and then say she did it?

    Her daughters' info?

    My info, and my husband's?

    But, of course, you had nothing to do with any of that, did you?

    But how will we ever know that, ANONYMOUS? You will be tarred with the same brush as all the other anonymous people who did.

    As if she has not been betrayed and attacked mercilessly for nearly a year!

    Called her work. Check.
    Sent police to home. Check. Twice.

    Published map to daughter's school. Check.

    Published new address and that of landlord. Check.

    Accused her of all manner of garbage. Check.

    Except for a couple of "go away--you bother me" attacks, Loretta did nothing until long after she had been attacked mercilessly.

    ReplyDelete
  45. I suppose ANONYMOUS could get out and about in her own community and blog about it. Almost every town has an old cemetery that has a tale or two to tell, a library that contains information about the town, or an old building or park that has a name that can be researched for a story.

    Trouble is, she'd have to come up with a name.

    It's so easy to try and tear people down.

    Loretta
    Stacey
    Monica
    Deege
    Ponder
    Barbara
    Nadine
    CountryGal
    Captain Joe
    Lisa
    Martin
    Moi
    Sadie
    GrandmaBoo
    Pegasus
    Astrologer
    Anne
    Rose
    Detroit Paula
    VillageWench
    Justin
    Jim
    Me

    Have I left anyone off your bash list?

    You don't know anything about any of us, really, you just pick and slash at our words, and at what we choose to reveal about ourselves.

    You don't care.

    We are supposed to take such care of your feelings and your information, and yet it's open season on all of us.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Unless "Anonymous" can cite any examples of where I maligned or defamed her publicly on my blog in any way - or even privately from purloined posts from a private blog - she has no case.

    I am entitled to my opinions and she does not have to read them. She will be incapable of demonstrating any way in which I sought her out, or anyone else over at Muttville, to malign them.

    If I was in a forum with a few posters with whom I (and others) disagreed, that does not constitute any overt attacks.

    None of them, save Diana (Mutt Mommy) had a blog, ever. How could I seek them out? How could I 'stalk' them?

    I didn't even know most of them existed until the original Bog Top opened. Then, they went to town on me.

    None of them had to read my blog. None of them are the scum of New Orleans whom I condemned. None of them are victims of a story I wrote or opinions I had on my blog.

    It's all bull.

    They took exception to my opinions and my stories, and that was their choice. I didn't ask them to read them or agree with them.

    Their premise is nonsense. They chose to defame and disparage me long before I ever bothered to find out who they were.

    And, if this anonymous is Andrea, she needs to get over herself. Nobody cares if someone on the Internet called her overbearing and boring. Nobody except a pack of bored mongrels with nothing to do.

    If any of them had any talent, they would write a real blog and gain their audience through their own work, not by bashing someone 24/7.

    So, spare me the melodrama. I left my miniature violin in the car.

    ReplyDelete
  47. To the anonymous mutt - I will concede to having a superiority complex, to posting my history, to telling my side of stories, and to bashing certain celebrities or idiots worthy of my scorn.

    I am superior to you. Life ain't fair.

    I will also continue to write and have an audience, and what will you have to show for your time? Ulcers?

    Not me. I don't lose any sleep over the likes of you.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Has the anonymous one chastised any of her friends at the bashing blogs for all of their outrageous comments, accusations, misrepresentations and out and out lies? This isn't a double standard, is it?

    ReplyDelete
  49. Sanctimonious Anonymous wrote:

    I am judging what Loretta SAID. Black and white. No ambiguity about it. And it's fitting with everything else she has said about the people of NO, parents of murdered children, Katie's sister, and the list goes on and on.

    Who are you to judge anything when you accuse me of judging others? If you're permitted to judge ME, I'm permitted to judge others. You cannot hold me to a different standard than you hold yourself.

    I don't care if you judge me. I don't care if you question my morals. I don't care if you think I'm a lousy writer. I don't care if you don't think I'm funny. I don't care if you think I'm homely. I don't care if you think I'm the biggest loser on the planet.

    I don't think about you at all. Your opinions mean nothing to me. I am not here to gain your approval. I don't want your approval.

    I don't want your love. I don't want your adulation. I don't want anything from you.

    I never wanted anything from any of you. You chose to insert yourself into MY life, my blog, my writing, my friends' blogs, my children's lives, and my business.

    Just because I write a blog does not make me open season for your defamation.

    Linking my name deliberately on search engines to defame me constitutes harassment.

    I am not responsible for the "tribute blogs" and I am not responsible for many other things of which I have been accused.

    I'm not going to defend myself to the likes of you.

    I stated my position on this blog a couple of weeks ago, and I stand by my statements.

    You don't have to believe them. You don't have to like them.

    Frankly, my dear, I don't give a damn.

    And as far as the mutts go, they can stick it where the sun don't shine, too.

    Their mission has failed. Stick a fork in it.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Sanctimonious Hypocrite Mutt wrote:

    Had Loretta not betrayed and attacked people so viciously and personally, I would not have a thing to say about this mean-spirited person

    Attacked viciously and personally? What do you call what the Mutts have been doing for 10 months? 10 months! Give it a rest! They have attacked me every which way but loose, dearie. How dare you even make such an IRONIC statement with a straight face! ROFL

    who is given to espousing wild conspiracy theories and who has an advanced-stage superiority complex.

    They are not my theories, but if you do some research, you may find yourself questioning the 'official' story. It's no skin off my nose if you want to believe that 19 Muslim extremists with boxcutters hijacked 4 planes simultaneously and defeated the most sophisticated and expensive air defense system in the world.

    It's your life. Believe what you want. But, I'm no kook. Smarter and better trained people than I are "espousing" these theories. There is a huge industry centered around it, and if you took a little time to venture outside the kennel (and quit obsessing about me, someone with really no significance in the big scope of things), you might learn something.

    Get a life. Find a cause worth investing your faux outrage. It's not me, babe. I'm not your enemy.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Yes, it really does.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Hi, Shina.

    I do feel sad for your baby, no matter what the mutts say.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I just don't believe the story about the picture.

    You were somthing awful as Samantha, you know.

    I wish you a happy life, though.

    ReplyDelete
  54. This isn't Shina. But in your words, I recognize that you do have a heart, Ronni, in spite of your obstinate support of someone who does not.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I'm sorry you can't see the heart in Loretta.

    I can.


    Mat 7:5 Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

    or something like that.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Shina, sorry about the misidentification.

    How in the world can you blame Loretta, when you were so awful for so long?

    You started the whole spamming thing, and for no reason. Repeat: NO REASON.

    You cannot expect her to be all wuvvy-dovey.

    If the shoe were on the other foot; if you could put yourself in her position and look at the situation through her eyes, I don't think you'd be believing in you, either.

    And, an anonymous denizen of the kennel brought you and your baby into this discussion, indeed, started the discussion.

    Before that, this was a couple of comments on the demise of other babies.

    Please note that the response of the mutt from Westborough, Mass. to my answer, that she requested I give, was to call it "weak excuses."

    You made up the story about the photoshopped picture. Remember that? And the mutts are still beating her with your lies.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Shina, the anonymous comment that you say was not you was made from the same IP as the comment you "own."

    ReplyDelete
  58. Westboro? Sounds like Andrea's work IP.

    And as far as Shina's situation, we still have no proof than anything she has ever written is true.

    When she produces a death certificate and that (non-existent) picture, then I'll apologize.

    Of course, the picture doesn't exist, she already admitted that to me over the phone, so let's just see the death certificate.

    Even if she can produce the death certificate, it does not excuse her behavior toward me or Miss Ann Thrope or any of the other people she terrorized online in the past couple of years.

    She's mentally ill.

    ReplyDelete
  59. I may be a sucker, but I believe she lost a baby. I just can't imagine being ill enough to post on the Angel site unless it were true.

    I know you have had more experience with internet sickos than I have, and, heaven knows, we read in the papers about nutcases that boggle the imagination, but I think she did lose a baby, and that's what set her off.

    I hope she gets help. She certainly has a hair trigger temper!

    ReplyDelete
  60. She is very, very ill. I would not be surprised if she invented the whole thing, posted on the angel site or any other site where she could pretend to be a part of some community of victims; all the while spamming and harassing and terrorizing women bloggers. Notice she never terrorizes male bloggers.

    I would not put it past her to invent the dead baby story, just as she invented so many other things. She stays up all night doing this garbage. She's capable of any number of things.

    So, yes, I think she could have made it all up. That's why I want a certified death certificate to prove this "Shane" child's death.

    I don't believe her.

    ReplyDelete
  61. Case in point - she posted all night long last night (in the wee hours) and spent God knows how long rehashing her little faux war with me. Claiming I'm stalking her.

    She's a bomb thrower. She throws bombs and then runs to see what the reaction will be.

    Give it up, Shina. I'm not your enemy. You have some major screws loose, honey.

    Not only are Anne and I completely separate people (easily verified by the IPs and the post style), she has given you all a way to contact her in Brazil through e-mail.

    Now, how in the world did I create an email address in Brazil?

    Obviously, I am not "Truth Teller" or the author or "owner" of those blogs. Just because I have commented on them or have had the stats emailed to me does not make me an owner.

    If I were the author/owner of those blogs, there would be a lot more on them. I would not be mincing words. I would not be dangling little teasers. I would have posted everything I had.

    Since I don't control them, I am just a reader like you.

    ReplyDelete
  62. The difference between Anne and me is that Anne is very subtle and very careful. She has all sorts of information, but she is merely giving you the tip of the iceburg.

    She has all the goods on all of the mutts who have blogs in their names. Just your being aware of that should be enough to give you pause.

    If it doesn't, then I guess you don't care if the entire world will have access to your past.

    Since you made my past (and fictionalized versions of it) the premise of all your bashing blogs, it will be interesting to see how you feel when the shoe is on the other foot.

    There is public documentation of a number of things about many of you. Some of you make me look like Mother Theresa.

    You all should take a good look at what you are doing and realize that what you have done is invite anyone and everyone to investigate your life and expose it as you have tried to do with mine.

    If you live in a glass house (which you certainly do, Shina - I'd say it's more like a greenhouse), you really need to be aware that everything you say and have done and is recorded and documented and accessible through online sources and personal sources - can and will be used against you.

    Caveat Basher.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Nobody is stalking Shina!

    Sheesh! As if we have nothing better to do!

    ReplyDelete
  64. Just to give you an idea of who we have voluminous information about that is extremely unflattering, incriminating, indicative of very poor judgment, indicative of bad partner choices, indicative of out-of-wedlock pregnancies, abortions, adoptions, adultery, substance abuse, arrests, DUIs, insurance fraud, burglary and various other convictions, spouses or SOs with nefarious histories, pornography, prostitution, STDs, jail sentences....

    This information has been gathered about Jeanne, Cathy, Lora, Katie, Genna, Leslie, Susan, Deanna, Shina, and others.

    The only person who is absolutely squeaky clean is Andrea.

    So, congratulations, Andrea! You are an exception to the cesspool. Maybe that should give you pause, too. The only thing you are guilty of is being a boring putz with a drinking problem.

    ReplyDelete
  65. The thing about Us vs. The Mutts is that we don't want to interfere in their real lives, damage their reputations at work, annoy their families, or have CPS investigate their households.

    We just want them to quit maligning us.

    Who died and made them the Internet Morality Squad, anyway?

    ReplyDelete
  66. Frankly, I don't care what they do or don't do in their real lives. I don't care what they feed their kids or where they sleep. I don't care where they live or what kind of car they drive. I don't care about their pasts, presents or futures.

    If they hadn't started their crap, I would never have bothered to think twice about who they were.

    As it is, I have a very good friend who is a private investigator and has supplied me with everything I never wanted to know about all of them.

    Gratis.

    I have not had to do any sleuthing of my own. I have no time for it, anyway. Thank goodness it is in my email regularly.

    The mutts think I have made dangerous enemies (LOL), yeah, right. I have made some very valuable friends who have all sorts of talents and licenses - like lawyers, PIs and cops.

    The ying and yang of all things balance. Where the mutts are negative, I have wonderful, positive things going on. Where the mutts dig up their dirt, I have dirt supplied to me by the backhoe full on each one of them.

    It's really quite simple. And, I don't have to lift a finger or use any time I have to write, research, read, work, remodel, sleep, speed neglect, etc...

    ReplyDelete
  67. So, the moral of the story is - what you put out in the universe comes back to you. Everything balances. You fill your life with negative things, you attract negative things. Your life goes down the tubes.

    If you put out positive things, you get positive things back.

    The mutts have been reeking with negative vibes for months, and all the negativity they have put out there in the universe will come back to them in full.

    If they think I had it coming, wait until the universe rewards their behavior.

    ReplyDelete
  68. I just hope we can end this soon.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Of course, the Anonymous Mutt has limited her definition of "superiority complex" to the one in which it describes compensatory behavior. The first definition is "an exaggerated estimate of your own value and importance."

    I subscribe to that definition, however I don't know how anyone can have an exaggerated value of your own importance. I mean, after all, we all think we are the greatest things in the world, or should. Anyone who thinks other people are more important than themselves are just doormats.

    Did Jesus put everyone first? No. He taught humility, certainly, but ultimately he put himself at the right hand of God. That's a place of pretty high importance.

    Did Buddah or Mohammed put others in front of them? I don't bring this up as some kind of messiah complex (because I have no interest in saving others), but because the great leaders of religion and culture have all been egomaniacs.

    So, for me to be an egomaniac, I'm really compensating for deep-seated feelings of INFERIORITY; whereas, others who have high self-esteem and conceit are great leaders.

    It's another double standard.

    In fact, I don't have any feelings of inferiority in any way whatsoever. I do not feel inferior to the mutts or anyone else, for that matter. I think I am smarter than most (or all) of them; prettier than most (or all) of them; harder working, more talented, more versatile, more resilient, more capable, more competent, more amusing, more charismatic, more attractive, sharper, wittier, healthier, and more powerful.

    This is something I am very comfortable with. They can rant and rave about how I'm overcompensating blah blah, and how I really hate myself. HA! Anyone with even a passing acquaintance with me knows I really do think I am all that and a bag of chips. It may annoy some people, but so what? The people who are important to me, who count, who understand the big picture enjoy and embrace my attitude and cheer me on.

    The rest of you can just walk on by. Nobody is cyber cuffing you to me or my blog or my opinions. Just pass on by, dearie.

    ReplyDelete
  70. I fail to see why mutts have to bash your looks or intelligence.

    I don't mind so much when they go after what you say--anybody who has ever been opinionated gets that.

    Hell, even I think you are full of it sometimes! LOL!

    The point is that you have the guts to put your opinions out there. Of course people will disagree.

    But to carry that over to every other aspect of your life is way out of line.

    ReplyDelete
  71. I think that we have got soft in the way we raise kids. They grow into adults who expect life to be easy. They want to be surrounded by puppies and lambs and rainbows and sparkly things.

    And when their lives don't turn out to be like that, they have to create a fantasy life that is.

    They don't realize that puppies grow into dogs, lambs to sheep, and that it takes rain to make a rainbow, and a lot of heat and pressure to make a sparkly thing.

    The world is full of opinions. Most of us hang with the ones we like and ignore the rest.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Vero,

    I've been reading at misfitting long before the Peterson case. I found it googling something on the Amish here, a book I was reading at the time and that link took me to misfitting.
    I loved how Loretta wrote and the things she put on the blog. She will always be my favorite.
    I hate the blog wars thing, she doesn't deserve any or it.
    When she linked you, I loved your cat pictures! I have rescue cats, they are a part of the family and my kids got a kick out of seeing the pictures you've posted of your cats. My favorite was the cat on the rats cage. :)
    I'm your IP from Dover Ohio.
    I'm not a troll. I've just enjoyed your site and what you have posted. I've not clicked on to read somedays because I didn't want you to think I was from the swamp.

    ReplyDelete
  73. mbene, thank you for the kind words! I am so glad you like the cat pics!

    I like taking pictures, and the cats are so very handy. Plus, they frequently oblige by doing something cute or silly.

    I was told a long time ago that you were no troll, and certainly would not assume you were.

    There are people who read here from all over. Some found me while blog-hopping and came back for the fun of it.

    I've got a couple of blogs in my links that I found that way.

    Pick a name so you don't have to have your email addy up there, if you like.

    It's nice to meet you!

    ReplyDelete