leasheryn's Blog

While I was in Publix this morning, I overheard a conversation between the woman ahead of me and the cashier.  The woman stated that her son went to kindergarten this year and didn't like it.  She continued to say that she sat her son down and asked him if he wanted to go to school next year.  Her son said no, he didn't like school.  She decided that since he didn't like it, he didn't have to go the school again next year.  She thought there was little point in sending him to a place he didn't like.  She thought maybe if he wanted to go the following year, she would wait and ask him.  (I suppose if he decides he doesn't want to go the next year, she still wouldn't send him??)

Okay, so since when does a five year old child get to decide if he is going to school or not.  I thought school was  a requirement, not a choice.  Furthermore, a five year old child hasn't the ability to decide whether school is actually the right thing for him or not.  With this parent's attitude, the likelihood of this child spending anymore of his eighteen years in school is pretty much nil if the parent expects him to decide whether he is going or not. 

I have to ask, who's the stupid one here?  The parent or the child?  And who's got who wrapped around their little finger? 

There are two candidates running towards the Presidential election on the liberal side.  One a black man; the other a woman.  We all know their names, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton.  Is one more worthy than the other for this lofty position?  It's up to the people of this country to decide and we are all hanging on with baited breath waiting to see which of the above is going to go against Republican candidate, John McCain, in November. 

Making this decision is an important one and in doing so, the people  have to look very carefully at the abilities of each candidate, their track records and their personaiities since, if either succeeds, they will be in the public spotlight for all of 4 years.  But it seems as though there is more emphasis put on two little details instead of upon the entire scope of possibilities that have to be looked at very seriously.  Those two little details: one is a black man and the other a woman. 

It seems I hear over and over again someone uttering the line, "I'm voting for her because she's a woman" or "I'm voting for him because he'll be the first black president".  I have news for anyone who votes upon this reasoning.  YOU ARE DESCRIMINATING!!

Descriminatory

1. practicing discrimination, or showing prejudice
2. discriminating, or distinguishing

A candidate should never be distinguished as being anything other than a person and then selected due to their ability to hold the position. 

We've been pulling the race card and the woman card far too often.  In fact to the point where it is an universal excuse for every reason one is either selected for a job or not selected.  It's gone on for far too long and we should have progressed to the point where race and sex no longer matter and decisions based solely upon ability to preform. 

Everytime someone makes that excuse, pulls the race or woman card, they are descriminating and prolonging that descrimination.  Pulling that card puts emphasis upon the fact that neither of these candidates are worthy of the job based on their abilities.  Just because one is black and the other a woman doesn't make that candidate worthy of the job. 

Let's start thinking, people, and consider if you want a "face" to look at for 4 years or if you want someone who is capable at the helm of our country. 

Recent photos of Miley Cyrus published in Vanity Fair only leads towards the belief that here is yet another pop tart taking center stage and setting a poor example for pre-teens across America.  If this continues is Miley on her way to becoming another Britany, this time with her parents' approval? 

Children are already being pushed into adult situations that they are not mature enough, not ready enough and haven't the ability to understand.  They are lead to believe that what they see and what they hear is exactly the way it should be without having the ability to take a good long look at their surroundings and understand that there are options and choices all around them. 

It also seems a few years ago, women were appalled by having their bodies displayed in a subjective manner and they shouted about being ill-used and disrespected.  It seems to me that when photos such as those taken of Miley shows only that women have not moved forward in their thinking but have taken a huge step backwards if they approve this sort of behavior by a young woman displaying her body in such a manner. 

This is offensive and short-sighted at so many levels, both for young adults and for women. 

True, Miley is penitent now and says that she didn't understand.  But it was not her decision to make; it was her parents who stood aside and allowed the photo shot to go forward without questioning it or putting a stop to it.  They only decided otherwise once there was an outcrying against their behavior. 

It seems a shame when children are pushed into a spotlight, not because they have choices but because their parent's only desire is to exploit them. 

Whatever happens to Miley, let's hope she doesn't become another Britany but this incident must have put her into confusion and left her wondering where she stands in the world.   

When a parent sends a child to school, they send them with the expectation that they will receive an education.  But exactly what sort of education are they receiving at the hands of such as Debra LaFave and Stephanie Ragusa?  A couple of years ago, everyone was shouting when priests were underfire for molesting children.  Is there that much of a difference between an educational teacher and a spiritual teacher that one is less of a crime than the other?  Is one type of perversion so much different from another? 

A teacher is an educator, a role model for children, an example for a child to follow into his or her adulthood.  Many of us go through life with fond memories of a teacher who taught well or was a good mentor or gave us good advice at one time or another. 

A teacher is also someone who should be respected and they should enter their classrooms as a respectable adult.  In my day, a teacher dressed like a teacher and they stood apart as a leader in the classroom.  A teacher was in charge and didn't act like a child. 

A teacher is never a friend, never a buddy, never a pal.  A teacher is a teacher.  You never hung out with the teacher and heaven forbid the teacher ever hung out with the kids.  What kid, in their right mind, would want the teacher hanging out with them when they were doing or talking about things that only a kid would be interested in? 

It seems that parents are concerned, and rightly so, about who their children are connecting with on the internet or while text messaging.  There are alot of weird-o's out there in cyberspace but that is not the only place where weird-o's hang out.  They hang out in Burger King, on street corners and in parks.  And, it seems, they are hanging out in public schools scoping out your children as possibilities to molest, to satisfy their own needs, to steal the best years of their lives, to take away their childhood and to destroy their lives for one short moment of pleasure. 

It is time to start being concerned when your child is receiving emails, cell phone calls and text messages from a teacher.  It is time to start being concerned when your child is meeting a teacher at his or her house, at the park or if teacher is showing up at your door or bringing your child home from school.  There is no reason for a child to communicate with a teacher outside of school or on weekends.  Once school is out for the day, contact with a teacher is OVER!!

Be aware and beware.  Weird-o's and child molesters are not just on the internet, they are everywhere and waiting for the opportunity to put their hands all over your child!!

Warning: if you are eating, don't read this!

This afternoon I went out to lunch at a local buffet restaurant.  There was a young woman there also who was wearing a pair of pajama bottoms (they were low riders so they were around her hips) and a black crop top with I'm the Boss written across the front.  Okay, now many of you might be thinking that this isn't so bad and maybe it's quite normal for young women to dress like this but I'm missing one very important point: she had a big bare pregnant belly which she was supporting on the buffet counter as she was moving along filling her plate to overflowing.

Personally I was completely turned off my lunch and left shortly afterwards.  As a matter of fact, I was more than disgusted! 

Bringing a new life into the world is a wonderful event; it's also personal.  Although there's nothing wrong with sharing and most people are more than ready to share their best wishes towards the expecting mother but this sort of "sharing" isn't exactly the most appropriate kind, especially in the middle of a restaurant. 

In my opinion, this young woman couldn't even decide how to dressed appropriately, how is she expected to make good decisions for her new baby? 

What do you think?  Should this woman have known better than to appear in public dressed like this or should the restaurant be more selective about their customers and should they have turned this woman away? 

There were alot of people eating lunch, many elderly, isn't it better for the restaurant owner to ensure all their customers were comfortable or should they  have just closed their eyes to inappropriate dress and make this person happy?    

Born on April 23, 1928, Shirley Temple turns 80 today.  Known as America's Little Princess, Shirley Temple first appeared on film at the age of 3.  Shirley starred in films such as Curly Top, Stand Up and Cheer, Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm and Heidi. 

She is remembered for singing On the Good Ship Lollypop, Animal Crackers in My Soup, He was a Dandy and for the song she never got to sing, Over the Rainbow.  MGM Studios had been desperate to star Shirley in their blockbuster film The Wizard of Oz but being unable to negotiate with Shirley's film studio, 20th Century Fox, finally had to settle on Judy Garland for the role of Dorothy. 

Shirley Temple worked with a number of famous co-stars including Bojangles, Buddy Epson, Arthur Treacher and even John Wayne. 

During the 60's she became involved in Republican politics and became ambassador to Ghana. 

In all, Shirley has been a constant inspiration to girls throughout the years and will live on in our memories as the curly  haired little girl who won our hearts. 

Happy Birthday, Shirley, and best regards for many, many more to come. 

In days gone by, when someone was attempting to commit a crime, they planned very carefully so they wouldn't get caught.  It would seem natural that if someone were planning on doing something wrong, the very last thing they would ever want would be to get caught.  Sometimes they would wear masks or disguises, at one time Nixon and Reagan masks were very popular.  Or they would wear gloves to conceal fingerprints or make sure they were doing what they were doing far away from where anyone would see them and later identify them.  The very last thing they would want to do would be commit their crime in a place where there was a camera recording their activities for all to see and for all prosperity.     

A crime is something that someone does that is against the law.  That could be, for instance, stealing, fighting or murdering.  No one in their right mind does this sort of thing in a place that could later provide evidence against them.  As far as that goes, no one in their right mind would MANUFACTURE THEIR OWN EVIDENCE AGAINST THEMSELVES. 

HAS THE WHOLE WORLD GONE MAD?! 

It seems to me, the best way to keep out of trouble is to obey the laws and not do anything so stupid as to steal, fight or murder or for that matter commit any sort of crime.  That way, there is never any worry about getting caught doing something wrong.  That seems easy enough, if one tries hard enough, that is. 

However it seems that there are quite a few out there who want to think they can actually commit a crime and get away with it.  Granted most of them aren't particularly very smart and most of them make mistakes and yes, most of them get caught and go to jail.  AND it seems more and more often, they are stupid enough to get their crime on tape, post it all over the 'net and cry about it when they get caught. 

Look, if you're going to put it on the 'net, you might as well just buy time on the local networks or, better yet, get a spot on next years SuperBowl broadcast and advertise it to the whole world but don't whine and cry when the police come a-banging at your door, slap you in handcuffs and trot you off to the local lockup. 

I can't fathom why anyone would want a video of their crime.  There's always a chance it will fall in the wrong hands and, if you're posting it on the 'net, take it for granted, it's going to fall into the wrong hands.  Anyone can look at the 'net, not just other criminals or other idiots who think what you did is funny, amusing or entertainment.

Have we all become so egotistical that we have to have this "hey look at me" attitude.  Whatever happened to discretion?  Or keeping a low profile?  Does everyone have to be seen and get the attention or acclaim that being exposed can create?  Is there no such thing as self-esteem?  

Look, just don't get it on tape.  It's stupid and boring and everyone's not interested except maybe the nice policeman who's going to bang on your door with handcuffs or the nice district attorney who's going to show up in court with your tape of your crime in his hands.

Hillary Clinton said in a interview last week that she's knows her way around the kitchen.  Sure, okay, I can agree to that. 

Hillary Clinton knows her way around the kitchen.  She knows if she goes out the front door, circumvents the house and comes back in through another door, she can get around the kitchen.  Now if she goes in the opposite direction through a group of connecting rooms and corridors, she can also get around the kitchen.  In another way, if she goes upstairs, down a few hallways and back down another flight of stairs, she can get around the kitchen. 

Hillary Clinton knows her way around the kitchen the same way she knows her way around lots of other things.  For instance:

She knows her way around the truth and she knows her way around an awkward situation.  She knows her way around getting out of a lie and she knows her way around making other people believe in her lies. 

Hillary Clinton has made a career out of getting around all sorts of things; the kitchen is only one of those things.   It's about time the American people woke up and put a stop to her career. 

About 230 years ago, a group of people became bitter because they were discontented about the way their government was treating them.  Okay, they were downright angry. They were angry because they were paying excess taxes on everyday products and those taxes were not going towards their benefit but were benefitting a "special interest", ie a land very far away from where they were living.  They also had no representation in the mother land and therefore their voices were not heard and they had no ability to disagree with what was going on in the land very far away. 

These people were bitter. They were intolerably bitter and they clung to their Bibles and to their guns and to their beliefs that all men (and women) were created equally.  They were people with thoughts and feelings and beliefs and they felt they had the right to live free and independantly, making their own laws and rules which they felt would be fair to all.  And they believed that a group of people said to represent them in a land very far away didn't understand what life was like in a new country; they believed their representatives were out of touch with the real life they  had to face daily.    

These people took their bitterness and they took their anger, and, clinging to their Bibles and their guns, they fought for freedom, they fought for independence and they fought for change.  They believed in their rights and their power and their ability to create a better land and this they did.  They fought because of bitterness and they fought because they believed they had a right to a better life, a better way of living and the right to form their own country, their own government.  But it was that intolerable bitterness and that intolerable anger which caused them to take up their Bibles and their guns and fight for what they believed in. 

These people were George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and Paul Revere to name a few.  They were proud and they were strong and they were believers in themselves but they fought because they were bitter and they changed the world because bitterness equals change. 

The world has certainly moved on since their day.  Nowadays government expects us to tolerate, voicelessly, high taxes and special interests and other such atrocities.  They expect us to swallow our bitterness and accept what comes along soundlessly.  Government expects us to do as we're told and not quibble and government expects us not to complain when it gets out of hand.  Government expects us to believe everything government says is true. 

Has the world really moved on since the days of Washington, Franklin and company?  Certainly it has...we've learned to be tolerate.  Government doesn't want us to believe we are bitter; they don't want us to realize we can still "pick up our guns and our Bibles" and fight for what we believe in, fight for a better life and a better way of living. 

Because government knows bitterness equals change and heaven above knows the last thing government wants is change because change would mean no more cushy jobs in Washington.         

Children are a reflection of the parent.  Children are a wonderful creation brought into being by two people coming together as one to in order to bring a new life into the world.  When two people decide to create life, they take on a great deal of responsibility.  It takes time to raise a child properly and there is much to teach particularly to someone who is new to the world and knows very little about what is happening around them.  It is a parent's responsibility to make sure the child grows up with the ability to cope with and deal with situations as they come along in iife and to give them the ability to make good sound decisions. 

The behavior of a child is a direct reflection of the parent.  What that child does, says and how they act when they are in society and away from home, shows whether a parent has done their job correctly or not.  If a child misbehaves or acts like an animal, they show the world that the parents believe this sort of behavior to be correct. 

It is certainly true that everyone makes mistakes or makes bad decisions or takes a wrong action.  Children are particularly vulnerable when it comes to making these sorts of mistakes or wrong moves but a good parent is always there to correct and to show the right way of handling a situation.  If a parent refuses to correct, the child is lead to believe that they have done no wrong and will continue with this sort of behavior pattern. 

When children act incorrectly, a parent should be embarrassed and never defensive.  What the child has done is a reflection of the parent and shows the world the true light of the parents ability to parent.

When a child is brought up to be polite, respectful and pleasant, this is also a reflection of the parent.  A child who is looked upon by others as being kind, considerate and helpful is a child other people want to be around.  This is a child to whom a parent can be proud of because this child shows the world that the parents have done their job well. 

There are children people want to see and there are children who no one wants around.  It's a parents job to decide what sort of child they want to have and should think carefully about how they wish to be reflected through their children.     

Madonna is proposing a re-make of the classic movie "Casablanca" only with a twist. Her version of this ever endearing film will place the setting not in a Morocco being torn by WWII but in the midst of today's Iraqi conflict. So why would this be considered a re-make of the film Casablanca when it is not even going to be set in Casablanca as the original was? And exactly what is wrong with leaving a good thing alone?

You must remember this

A kiss is just a kiss,

a sigh is just a sigh.

The fundamental things apply

As time goes by.

How can anyone reproduce, with integrity, the perfection of the sexual tension between Rick Blaine (Humphrey Bogart) and Ilsa Lund (Ingrid Bergman)? There was a certain class and sophistication that existed in 1942 when this movie was filmed that is lacking with today's set of Hollywood actors and actresses.  .

And when two lovers woo

They still say, "I love you."

On that you can rely

No matter what the future brings

As time goes by.

The story of Casablance will always remain fresh and new to each generation who views such a wonderful story of desperation and love.  It is moving and touching and reachs out to the audience just as it is; in complete perfection, as each character yearns for the other and when faced with life altering choices.  It is a struggle to face the consequences, to make the right choice and to accept the consequences.

Moonlight and love songs

 Never out of date.

Hearts full of passion

Jealousy and hate.

Woman needs man

And man must have his mate

That no one can deny.

I cannot understand why there is such a need to take a wonderful film and change in into something that it was never meant to be.  Casablance is a story that can be told again and again just as it is and still touch the heart of all who see it with all their heart and soul going out to Rick and Ilsa and in the end crying for them with real passion and emotion.

 It's still the same old story

A fight for love and glory

 A case of do or die.

The world will always welcome lovers

 As time goes by.

The world loves and embraces Casablanca so please, let's just leave it alone!

Oh yes, the world will always welcome lovers

As time goes by.

While campaigning in Philadelphia, Hillary Clinton has compared herself to Rocky!  Oh the audacity!  How dare she compare herself to Rocky?  This character has not only been a personal favorite of mine but was also a great hero of my youth. 

Rocky was great!  He was a wonderful fighter and stood up for the right at all times.  He worked hard to achieve and to beat back the enemy everytime. When I was growing up every child admired Rocky and couldn't wait for the next episode in this long running series.  Even though you always knew that Rocky was going to win in the end, you were rivetted to your seat waiting for the outcome and cheering on Rocky until the end.

I loved Rocky and think it's terrible that Hillary (the arch-liar) should compare herself to such a noble, admired and well loved, endearing character as Rocky

PS Bullwinkle was great too!!.

Rocky was a heroic squirrel

He took off in such a whirl

Defeating Natasha and Boris

Who were often as dumb as Doris

There in a twinkle

Came his pal Bulwinkle

With a witty remark

Or a shot in the dark

These two were good friends

Right until the end

Amired by all

They left us enthralled

At the time of my youth

In which I now quoth.

Do you kow the difference between a luxury or a necessity.  Let's see how good you are.  List which of the follow you think is a luxury or a necessity.

Cell phone

SUV

GPS

Laptop

Starbucks coffee

Big Mac

Target

Plasma TV

Cable

American Idol

Credit or debit card

Playstation