The Toys Have Arrived!!!
Leah
can't fathom how I could justify it, other than my girls love to play with toys
and they no longer had any. I guess it's ingrained from being raised by a
Jewish mother. :}
The favorite: I could have predicted it. The plush squirrel with the velcro
closure and extra squeakers. They already tore the tail off of it, but the
rest of it is holding up very nicely. Madigan is sleeping with her head on it
now. I tried to preserve it by telling MacKenzie to drop it every time she
picked it up (Madigan won't hurt her woobies), but Madigan would just pick it
up and tease her with it. Their favorite thing in the whole world is to play
tug with a woobie. So I let them, and kept checking it. (They do a GREAT
"drop it" - frankly, I didn't think they'd stop in the middle of tug and comply
immediately like they did, several times, with no treat).
The dud: Glo-Ball. I bought it so I could play ball with Madigan at night,
but she's not interested. Frisbee, frisbee, frisbee. (Got a nice soft floppy
frisbee to take to the park tomorrow, along with a chuck-it and a supply of
balls. She'll play ball at the park.)
Kenzie chased it for a couple of minutes, but then would drop it and lose
interest.
Surprise use: Air Dog. Wasn't sure what I wanted to do with it. It's too big
and hard to throw for Madigan, but it seems sturdy enough to stand up to
Kenzie, so I figured I'd give it a try. When I let them out tonight, Madigan
brought it outside (she never brings her toys out), and she and Kenzie played
keep-away with it in the back yard. So now it's a back yard toy. Until we go
to the beach, that is.
Sturdy tug department: Fuzzy rope. It feels really delicate - I was
discouraged when I first touched it. Figured the girls would pull it apart in
seconds. But it's already gone through a few rounds, and holds up very well.
Unfortunately, the tug toy of choice is Squirrel.
Stupid human department: Putting jelly in the Havaball. It's the black, extra
tough one, and I think it may last with Kenzie. I caught her trying to tear
the skin off the Jumball (why in the world did I get that??? - it's too big
for Madigan's mouth), so I substituted the Havaball. She wasn't interested.
So I figured, let me smear some peanut butter in there. Went to the frig. No
pb. Hmm. Hey, there's jelly! Wasn't until I poured some in that I
realized... this will stain the rug. Poured it out again. Oh well.
Future potential department: The kong crazy ball. Kenzie was tossing it
around for a while. Apparently prefers the toys she can destroy, but hopefully
she'll go back to it. Preferably not to chew the protrusions off of it.
I also got "Calming Signals" and two books by Jean Donaldson - "Mine," and...
something about aggressive dogs (forget the title). And the "My Dog Can Do
That" game. And a bunch of extra squeakers, and three dog chews that are
supposed to last longer than rawhide.
Poor Murphy. She kept going to the now-full toy box and looking for something
for her. But the only thing she's interested in is food, and I'm saving the
chews (they had rawhide today).
Hey, Jenn (and any other PS trainers): I'm going to start a My Dog Can Do That
class. Talked to my AT about it, and she said she had one going for two years,
the same 11 people, all paying $89 for each 8 weeks of it.
PetsMart Pet Trainer
See My Furry Family At:
http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/dogs0
diddy
>
> I have been horrified at myself ever since I ordered $200 of dog toys. I still
> can't fathom how I could justify it, other than my girls love to play with toys
> and they no longer had any. I guess it's ingrained from being raised by a
> Jewish mother. :}
read it, I took it in terms that you were calling yourself M&M&Z's
jewish mother. I just reread it, and interpreted that your lavish
spending gave YOU horrors because your Jewish mother didn't raise you
that way. If this is the correct interpretation, I owe you an apology.
I was appalled that I was thinking you disavowed your back garage
religion and were calling yourself Jewish, once again, because it seemed
to be the religion of the hour. I hope I do owe you an apology, begin I
would hope you aren't changing religions like hats.
--
just diddy
"I have no direct experience with this, but in my opinion...."
to be applied to all previous statements
diddy
I guess it's ingrained from being raised by a
> Jewish mother. :}
>
JEWISH mother? Is this the fad religion of the day? I thought you were a
back garage homemade designer christian so that you could make your own
rules and justifications as you went along?
Since when did you become jewish again?
Must be a matter of convenience. I have a feeling this will get your
this months quota of attention.
Tara
> Leah wrote:
> I guess it's ingrained from being raised by a
>
>>Jewish mother. :}
>>
>
>
> JEWISH mother? Is this the fad religion of the day? I thought you were a
> back garage homemade designer christian so that you could make your own
> rules and justifications as you went along?
> Since when did you become jewish again?
> Must be a matter of convenience. I have a feeling this will get your
> this months quota of attention.
This would be one of those "helpful" posts...right?
just checking in advance so I'm not lost when that part comes up again.
Tara
Dimpled Chad
<3E51A3DF...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation>,
diddy <di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation> wrote:
> I owe you an apology.
> I was appalled that I was thinking you disavowed your back garage
> religion and were calling yourself Jewish, once again, because it seemed
> to be the religion of the hour. I hope I do owe you an apology, begin I
> would hope you aren't changing religions like hats.
I'd think you also owe an apology for calling it a "back garage
religion". It was pretty harsh, Diddy...
Chad
--
Looking for a pet? Adopt one! ** http://www.petfinder.com
"An author doesn't necessarily understand the meaning of his own story
better than anyone else." C.S. Lewis
Leah
>> I have been horrified at myself ever since I ordered $200 of dog toys. I
>still
>> can't fathom how I could justify it, other than my girls love to play with
>toys
>> and they no longer had any. I guess it's ingrained from being raised by a
>> Jewish mother. :}
>Never mind, I can read this by a different interpretation. Last time I
>read it, I took it in terms that you were calling yourself M&M&Z's
>jewish mother. I just reread it, and interpreted that your lavish
>spending gave YOU horrors because your Jewish mother didn't raise you
>that way. If this is the correct interpretation, I owe you an apology.
>I was appalled that I was thinking you disavowed your back garage
>religion and were calling yourself Jewish, once again, because it seemed
>to be the religion of the hour. I hope I do owe you an apology, begin I
>would hope you aren't changing religions like hats.
We've been all over this. I'll always be Jewish by heritage, because I was
born Jewish and raised by Jewish parents. I'm a Christian by conversion.
The reference I was making was to my Jewish mother's stereotypical Jewish
mother's way of feeling guilty if her child didn't have everything she wanted.
It was a joke.
diddy
Nope, it's a bonafide snarky one. I admit when they are intended that
way. But if you read the next post, you will see as I re-read that post
that I may have to eat crow, because I may have misread and
misinterpreted. I hope I have to.
(Incidentally, when I am overtly intentionally snarky, and get called on
it, I admit it. I also admit to misinterpreting posts.... unlike you.
diddy
Then I TRULY must eat crow because of my stridently snarky remarks. I am
very sorry on that call. I misread, and misinterpreted. I know how that
feels, because I was misinterpreted today, and people couldn't admit
they were wrong, they had to somehow make their failure in reading
comprehension my fault.
I stand down, and duly take my lashes.
diddy
>
> I'd think you also owe an apology for calling it a "back garage
> religion". It was pretty harsh, Diddy...
>
> Chad
I don't doubt her faith.. i have a sister that seemed to have found a
religion just like it when she was in Florida.
Seems she had an affair witrh her minister, had his baby. Divorced her
husband. Found out the minister had a baby by a 14 year old girl, and
left. She then remarried her husband, then had an affair with the deacon
in the church, had his baby, all the while her husband was having an
affair with the ministers wife, and they mutually got divorced and went
with their partners. All justified and condoned by the church. They are
truly religious. You wouldn't believe the nasty comments exchanged
because I'm not a believer in their true religion.
*sheesh* You gotta watch those Florida grassroots ministries. No more
evangelical miracles ever happened more than within their walls. I just
happen to be a skeptic.
Rocky
> (Incidentally, when I am overtly intentionally snarky, and
> get called on it, I admit it. I also admit to
> misinterpreting posts.... unlike you.
Are you including the posts that you've cancelled?
--
--Matt. Rocky's a Dog.
Leah
>Then I TRULY must eat crow because of my stridently snarky remarks. I am
>very sorry on that call. I misread, and misinterpreted. I know how that
>feels, because I was misinterpreted today, and people couldn't admit
>they were wrong, they had to somehow make their failure in reading
>comprehension my fault.
>I stand down, and duly take my lashes.
Wow. You mean we actually came to an understanding on something??? :}
Tara
> Tara wrote:
>
>>diddy wrote:
>>
>>>Leah wrote:
>>> I guess it's ingrained from being raised by a
>>>
>>>
>>>>Jewish mother. :}
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>JEWISH mother? Is this the fad religion of the day? I thought you were a
>>>back garage homemade designer christian so that you could make your own
>>>rules and justifications as you went along?
>>>Since when did you become jewish again?
>>>Must be a matter of convenience. I have a feeling this will get your
>>>this months quota of attention.
>>
>>This would be one of those "helpful" posts...right?
>>
>>just checking in advance so I'm not lost when that part comes up again.
>>
>>Tara
>
>
> Nope, it's a bonafide snarky one. I admit when they are intended that
> way. But if you read the next post, you will see as I re-read that post
> that I may have to eat crow, because I may have misread and
> misinterpreted. I hope I have to.
> (Incidentally, when I am overtly intentionally snarky, and get called on
> it, I admit it. I also admit to misinterpreting posts.... unlike you.
>
Well then you won't mind clarifying some of the things you said (since
it seems I wasn't the only one here who obviously misinterpreted what
was being said). Earlier I did ask you to please explain the helpful and
gentle interpretation for the following quote. I'm still waiting.
"you, yourself have relatively little experience with difficult dogs
except for Solo, which you cop-out and give him medications instead of
what he needs."
In the meantime, why don't you explain how the other things you said
were all misinterpreted and how you meant all the best by the following.
You wrote:
"Your posts are focused on you, your needs, your pleasures your
successes. Not a thing wrong with that. But it obviously isn't the kind
of life Solo wants and needs."
"I wish you wouldn' quit being snarky and defensive and just acknowledge
the problem
He's a frustrated designer dog. In a designer clothes fashion conscious
world."
If you can't see the backhanded insults inherent in those comments (and
this was well before things got heated, by the way) then its my opinion
that you're lying to someone.
Nevermind. I should know better than to expect forthrightness. It is
disappointing though.
Tara
Leah
> i have a sister that seemed to have found a
>religion just like it when she was in Florida.
>Seems she had an affair witrh her minister, had his baby. Divorced her
>husband. Found out the minister had a baby by a 14 year old girl, and
>left. She then remarried her husband, then had an affair with the deacon
>in the church, had his baby, all the while her husband was having an
>affair with the ministers wife, and they mutually got divorced and went
>with their partners. All justified and condoned by the church. They are
>truly religious. You wouldn't believe the nasty comments exchanged
>because I'm not a believer in their true religion.
>*sheesh* You gotta watch those Florida grassroots ministries. No more
>evangelical miracles ever happened more than within their walls. I just
>happen to be a skeptic.
I didn't know Protestant was considered grassroots. :}
In any church I know around here, none of those people would be allowed to hold
positions of power if they carried on like that. If they didn't repent, they
may not even be allowed back to the church.
In some churches, even divorced people aren't allowed to hold positions within
the church.
BethF
"Rocky" <2p...@rocky-dog.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9325D7BD02A8Bau...@news.cis.dfn.de...
> diddy wrote in rec.pets.dogs.behavior:
>
> > (Incidentally, when I am overtly intentionally snarky, and
> > get called on it, I admit it. I also admit to
> > misinterpreting posts.... unlike you.
>
> Are you including the posts that you've cancelled?
this seems uncharacteristically catty.
Rocky
>> > (Incidentally, when I am overtly intentionally snarky, and
>> > get called on it, I admit it. I also admit to
>> > misinterpreting posts.... unlike you.
>>
>> Are you including the posts that you've cancelled?
> this seems uncharacteristically catty.
I think that it's a fair question.
BethF
I think its obvious that someone cancelling posts regrets what they said in
them, don't you?
Rocky
>> >> > (Incidentally, when I am overtly intentionally
>> >> > snarky, and get called on it, I admit it. I also
>> >> > admit to misinterpreting posts.... unlike you.
>> >>
>> >> Are you including the posts that you've cancelled?
>>
>> > this seems uncharacteristically catty.
>>
>> I think that it's a fair question.
>
> I think its obvious that someone cancelling posts regrets
> what they said in them, don't you?
I didn't think so at the time and I've seen no reason to change
my opinion.
Jenn asked diddy why the posts couldn't be read and diddy said
that she'd cancelled them because she figured that everyone had
read them.
That was obfuscation - not regret.
Anyway, I'm not going to do a "he said, she said" thing with
you.
BethF
I am not talking about what anyone said.
I just asked you why you think folks cancel posts?
Melinda Shore
diddy <di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation> wrote:
>JEWISH mother? Is this the fad religion of the day?
Uh, Diddy? She *was* raised by a Jewish mother.
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - sh...@panix.com
If you send me harassing email, I'll probably post it
Melinda Shore
BethF <be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote:
>I just asked you why you think folks cancel posts?
When I cancel posts it's usually because I didn't proofread
and butchered language worse than usual.
shelly
news:3E51AD81...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situ
ation,
diddy <di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation>
typed:
> Back garage/grass roots ordainment by mail = same thing
first of all, i don't recall Leah ever stating that her
minister got his/her ordination via mail. while i'm sure your
criticisms of your sister's church are valid, i do not think
it's fair to superimpose your own experience on Leah's church
or faith. that's a pretty big brush you're using, and it's
painting an ugly picture. you owe Leah an apology.
--
shelly and elliott & harriet
http://home.bluemarble.net/~scouvrette
shelly
Melinda Shore <sh...@panix.com> typed:
-
> When I cancel posts it's usually because I didn't proofread
> and butchered language worse than usual.
that or when i realize i've double- or triple-sent a post. i
don't think i've ever cancelled a post out of remorse for bad
behavior.
Marcel Beaudoin
news:20030217233054...@mb-de.aol.com:
> In some churches, even divorced people aren't allowed to hold
> positions within the church.
My mom was shunned by the members of her church 'cause my dad cheated on
her and left her. The priest did what he could, but she ended up having to
change churches.
Marcel
Dimpled Chad
"shelly" <scouv...@bluemarble.net> wrote:
> first of all, i don't recall Leah ever stating that her
> minister got his/her ordination via mail. while i'm sure your
> criticisms of your sister's church are valid, i do not think
> it's fair to superimpose your own experience on Leah's church
> or faith. that's a pretty big brush you're using, and it's
> painting an ugly picture. you owe Leah an apology.
I think that the above is correct; it is one thing to critique
"ordination by mail," and I'd probably share your assessment of your
sister's church. Leah's denomination, though, isn't necessarily part of
the same kettle of fish...
Chad
(Off for the day...)
Sionnach
"Leah" wrote:
> In some churches, even divorced people aren't allowed to hold positions
within
> the church.
Which is a highly UN-Christian practice. :-P Churches like that give true
Christians like my parents a bad name.
Sionnach
"Rocky" wrote:
> Are you including the posts that you've cancelled?
Hm. Would that be the post where Diddy says: "JEWISH mother? Is this the
fad religion of the day? I thought you were a
back garage homemade designer christian .."
Or did she say even shittier things in posts I didn't see?
Diddy, FYI: being a Jewish mother isn't dependent on being someone who
practices the Jewish religion.
diddy
their high energy dogs that not just anyone can handle. Obviously in her
current environment, she CAN'T handle him herself, so she chooses to
medicate. She brought Solo into it, and I commented that with meeting
his needs in an appropriate manner instead of medicating him down to her
level that she is able to provide currently, he will probably be able to
go medication free as he was in the past. I don't think there is
anything catty about that at all. If the reverse situation were true,
and she stated that about my dog, you would be supporting her all the
way, and condemning me for having a designer dog in innappropriate
circumstances, in spite of my efforts to make up the difference.
> Tara
diddy
>
> In article <3E51A297...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation>,
> diddy <di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation> wrote:
> >JEWISH mother? Is this the fad religion of the day?
>
> Uh, Diddy? She *was* raised by a Jewish mother.
asked her to confirm that interpretation. I jumped on her before I
understood what she meant, and once clarified, I realized i had made a
horrible error.
diddy
>
> >diddy di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation wrote:
> >Then I TRULY must eat crow because of my stridently snarky remarks. I am
> >very sorry on that call. I misread, and misinterpreted. I know how that
> >feels, because I was misinterpreted today, and people couldn't admit
> >they were wrong, they had to somehow make their failure in reading
> >comprehension my fault.
> >I stand down, and duly take my lashes.
>
> Wow. You mean we actually came to an understanding on something??? :}
I deserve that
>
> PetsMart Pet Trainer
> See My Furry Family At:
> http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/dogs0
shelly
news:3E52370B...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situ
ation,
diddy <di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation>
typed:
> Well he Is a frustrated designer dog. BC owners pride
> themselves in
> their high energy dogs that not just anyone can handle.
i don't see any evidence of that sort of pride in Melanie's
posts. if it did exist, that would seem to me to be a bit
twisted.
> Obviously in her current environment, she CAN'T handle him
> herself, so she chooses to medicate.
did you miss the post where she said that she knows of a
working BC who lives on a farm (IOW, he has the ideal living
environment) but still needs to be medicated? it's not as
simple as BC + sheep = happy, healthy dog. even if Solo had
the perfect environment, he may still need to be medicated.
some people are the same way.
diddy
>
> diddy (di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation) wrote:
>
> : Nope, it's a bonafide snarky one. I admit when they are intended that
> : way.
>
> No, you don't. Liar. That is a bald-faced lie.
>
> --
What do you mean? I did admit to pegging out the snark meter. Are you
saying i didn't?
diddy
Leah,
I agree that I was wrong. I was equating your previous justifications,
and flipping the continuity page with explaination of miracles, all
based on religion. This triggered an awful monster in me, over
frustrations with my sister, who does all these, to me, awful things,
and justifies them all. She's sanctimonious and rabidly self rightious.
You do not beat us to death with your religion, and I believe you are a
very kind person. If your religion gives you inner peace, I'm glad you
found it. I got triggered by a sister, who reminds me a lot of you in
many ways and applied what i know of her, and all the ugly frustrations
i have with her oozed all over my picture of you. Boy was i out of line.
You are in no way connected with my sister, or her religion, and boy
was I way out there.
I really was upset with myself last night in my treatment of you and
sorted out a lot of things about what exactly pushes my buttons about
you, and it always came down to my sister. Gosh, you never met the
woman, you certainly can't be responsible for my repressed and deeply
seated angst about her.
You aren't responsible for any of the things that trigger my snark
meter about you. They are seriously misplaced, and I don't expect you to
accept my apology, for I have been wickedly evil to you. I promise to
try to do better.
On a good note, I discovered a lot of things that have been repressed
in soul searching, that i hope i can apply towards my sister, and
perhaps maybe create a bridge to reach her.
I know this is of little consequence to you, and you were my victim.
I hope you continue to enjoy your doggies, and I know you adore them
very much, and they are your world. I identify with that. I hope we can
start over.
I hope we can start over.
Leah
>even if Solo had
>the perfect environment, he may still need to be medicated.
>some people are the same way.
I'm sure that even if he lived on a sheep farm, he'd still need his medication.
The only way to correct a chemical imbalance is to change the chemistry.
diddy
I know, I realized that I had misinterpreted that post. I am sorry.
Gwen Watson
Sionnach wrote:
> Diddy, FYI: being a Jewish mother isn't dependent on being someone who
> practices the Jewish religion.
Certainly not. I was accused of this by a research scientist here, when
my daughter fled and hid in Australia last year. Oh well I care
and I certainly don't mind being accused of being a jewish mom.
In fact it made me rather proud.
Gwen
diddy
Absolutely you are right, and no equasions I made were valid. I do owe
her a sincere apology. Thank you for bringing this to my attention and
caring enough to see that I rectified it.
Leah, in case you missed the last post on my apology, I DO apologize,
and will try to temper my feelings and no longer make rash invalid
equasions.
diddy
>
> In article <b2t9hi$1f7idp$1...@ID-39167.news.dfncis.de>,
> "shelly" <scouv...@bluemarble.net> wrote:
>
> > first of all, i don't recall Leah ever stating that her
> > minister got his/her ordination via mail. while i'm sure your
> > criticisms of your sister's church are valid, i do not think
> > it's fair to superimpose your own experience on Leah's church
> > or faith. that's a pretty big brush you're using, and it's
> > painting an ugly picture. you owe Leah an apology.
>
> I think that the above is correct; it is one thing to critique
> "ordination by mail," and I'd probably share your assessment of your
> sister's church. Leah's denomination, though, isn't necessarily part of
> the same kettle of fish...
>
> Chad
Leah
>My mom was shunned by the members of her church 'cause my dad cheated on
>her and left her. The priest did what he could, but she ended up having to
>change churches.
That's because people suck. :} No matter what faith or lack of it.
In my 10,000 member church, the cheatin' dad may be approached by elders and
counseled to repent. Your mom would have her choice of several on-going
relevant people-helping-people seminars and classes to help her heal.
Nothing wrong with changing churches. It's not a matter of changing God, it's
a matter of choosing between His people. People are people, with all their
faults, no matter how devout they may be.
Leah
>> Wow. You mean we actually came to an understanding on something??? :}
>I deserve that
Don't discount the smiley.
You are snarky and mean so often in your posts, and not just to me, that most
of it just slides off my shoulders. That's your way. You're a hinky GSD,
over-reacting to the approach of people.
But you're also clever, insightful (with dogs if not always people), and
obviously a very talented trainer. Plus you *can* be quite nice and
personable. IMHO, you're worth continued attempts to befriend.
So... you can interpret my last post as "no hard feelings."
I hope you feel the same after this one. :}
Leah
>Leah, in case you missed the last post on my apology, I DO apologize,
>and will try to temper my feelings and no longer make rash invalid
>equasions.
And in case you missed mine... no hard feelings. :}
Marcel Beaudoin
news:20030218095114...@mb-ck.aol.com:
>>Marcel Beaudoin mbea...@caduceonlabs.com wrote:
>>My mom was shunned by the members of her church 'cause my dad cheated
>>on her and left her. The priest did what he could, but she ended up
>>having to change churches.
>
> That's because people suck. :} No matter what faith or lack of it.
>
> In my 10,000 member church, the cheatin' dad may be approached by
> elders and counseled to repent. Your mom would have her choice of
> several on-going relevant people-helping-people seminars and classes
> to help her heal.
Unfortunately, that was not an option. My dad decided that he wanted out.
It really had a big effect on my mom. For the longest time (a couple of
years) she had trouble with god b/c god is portrayed as a male, and it was
a male that betrayed her...
She is much better now. FOr that I am thankful, as she and my dad will be
walking me down the aisle this summer when I get married.
Marcel
Melissa S. Frye
news:b2tdme$1f5k97$1...@ID-39167.news.dfncis.de...
> > Obviously in her current environment, she CAN'T handle him
> > herself, so she chooses to medicate.
>
> did you miss the post where she said that she knows of a
> working BC who lives on a farm (IOW, he has the ideal living
> environment) but still needs to be medicated? it's not as
> simple as BC + sheep = happy, healthy dog. even if Solo had
> the perfect environment, he may still need to be medicated.
> some people are the same way.
I have a high drive border - anyone seeing Dell work wouldn't deny that.
Dell has run the pads off her feet and ripped off a dewclaw and never
blinked.
But she has an off-switch and an ability to relax. Considering her early
life, I am sure that came built in, much like I expect Fly has.
I have seen lower drive dogs without off switches/anxiety are just easier to
handle/ less destructive. Dosen't make them any happier.
It does have to do with selection for certain working traits without
considering the whole dog, but it doesn't directly correlate to drive.
And really, options for Solo are basically A. a needle or B. Life with
Melanie medicated C. stuck in a foster home trying to find a suitable home
with a farm sheep and owners willing to committee to long-term work on a dog
with issues (good luck).
Solo is very lucky.
--
Melissa S. Frye
Skyrocket cockers www.mfrye.com/skyrocket/
Leah
>I really was upset with myself last night in my treatment of you and
>sorted out a lot of things about what exactly pushes my buttons about
>you, and it always came down to my sister. Gosh, you never met the
>woman, you certainly can't be responsible for my repressed and deeply
>seated angst about her.
> You aren't responsible for any of the things that trigger my snark
>meter about you. They are seriously misplaced, and I don't expect you to
>accept my apology, for I have been wickedly evil to you. I promise to
>try to do better.
> On a good note, I discovered a lot of things that have been repressed
>in soul searching, that i hope i can apply towards my sister, and
>perhaps maybe create a bridge to reach her.
> I know this is of little consequence to you, and you were my victim.
> I hope you continue to enjoy your doggies, and I know you adore them
>very much, and they are your world. I identify with that. I hope we can
>start over.
Diddy, I am in tears right now. IMHO, the slate is wiped completely clean.
Here, take this cyber-hug (((((DIDDY))))).
See, miracles happen every day. :}
diddy
> Diddy, I am in tears right now. IMHO, the slate is wiped completely clean.
of you. I'm glad you took my apology at face value. It was sincere.
Heres a hankie. Heck, here's the box if you will share it with me.
*hugs*((((Leah)))*hugs*
>
> See, miracles happen every day. :}
shelly
Melissa S. Frye <mf...@surfree.com> typed:
> I have a high drive border - anyone seeing Dell work
> wouldn't deny that. Dell has run the pads off her feet and
> ripped off a dewclaw and never blinked.
> But she has an off-switch and an ability to relax.
> Considering her early life, I am sure that came built in,
> much like I expect Fly has.
absolutely. i was speaking only of Solo and the possibility
that he may need to be medicated even if he were living in the
perfect environment.
i hope my post didn't come across as a statement that all BCs
are A) hinky, B) super high drive, and C) lacking an off
switch. i *do* realize that drive is independent of Solo's
issues.
> I have seen lower drive dogs without off switches/anxiety
> are just easier to handle/ less destructive. Dosen't make
> them any happier.
nope. i own one of those dogs (Boxer, not BC). she doesn't
begin to have Solo's issues (and thusfar hasn't needed
medication) and i'm able to keep her pretty happy, but without
the proper management she would be a train wreck. while she's
high octane even for a Boxer, it's pretty obvious to me just
from my experience with harriet that anxiety is not related to
drive. some dogs' branes are just borkened.
> It does have to do with selection for certain working
> traits without considering the whole dog, but it doesn't
> directly correlate to drive.
absolutely.
> And really, options for Solo are basically A. a needle or
> B. Life with Melanie medicated C. stuck in a foster home
> trying to find a suitable home with a farm sheep and owners
> willing to committee to long-term work on a dog with issues
> (good luck).
> Solo is very lucky.
i'll second that. i think he's in just about the best
possible place for him (he's got an owner who cares, is
attuned to his needs, and is willing and able to meet them).
it sounds like he's got it pretty good. he could be living on
a farm with all the sheep in the world with an owner who
didn't care or know enough to realize that he needs help.
diddy
>
> >diddy di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation wrote:
>
> >> Wow. You mean we actually came to an understanding on something??? :}
>
> >I deserve that
>
> Don't discount the smiley.
>
> You are snarky and mean so often in your posts, and not just to me, that most
> of it just slides off my shoulders. That's your way. You're a hinky GSD,
> over-reacting to the approach of people.
I deserve that too. I do tend to call things as I see them even if it
hurts. In this instance, I was very wrong. I also tend to react to
something, and fire, rather than to assess whether what I am reacting to
was interpretted correctly. This is a huge failing on my part. I can
see, I am not alone in this weakness.
I get cranky with you for starting huge flame wars, when I am equally
liable along with many others. I need to put safety guards on my
buttons.
>
IMHO, you're worth continued attempts to befriend.
You are a big person to be able to accept my apology after the way I
have treated you.
Tara
> I am not talking about what anyone said.
>
> I just asked you why you think folks cancel posts?
It strikes me as disingenuous to try and bring the conversation into a
general realm when he specifically stated that the specific context was
what gave him that impression, Beth.
People cancel posts for a lot of reasons. Some might do so out of
embarrassment (as distinguished from remorse), some do so realizing
the premise was faulty and therefore completely off topic, and yes,
I'm quite sure people cancel them out of remorse (though usually an
acknowledgment is a better hallmark of remorse than hiding the evidence).
I'm sure there are also a lot of variations on those reasons as well.
And no, I don't think they all boil down to feeling remorse by any
stretch of the imagination.
Tara
Tara
That's not UN-Christian. Catholics don't even acknowledge divorce to a
large degree. (<----whole family is Catholic. I'm a life long heathen).
But then I'm not a huge fan of organized religion, so....
Tara
Tara
> In news:b2tiad$2gp$1...@slb4.atl.mindspring.net,
> while she's
> high octane even for a Boxer, it's pretty obvious to me just
> from my experience with harriet that anxiety is not related to
> drive. some dogs' branes are just borkened.
While I don't think the presence of anxiety is related to drive, I agree
with Melissa here in that the *intensity* of the reactions and the
overall impact sure are.
I know that Finn's reactions to his fear have always been directly
related to whether or not his prey drive has been engaged. I've noticed
that in a lot of other dogs with high octane drives as well. I found out
a few years ago that a local behaviorist was looking into exercise and
getting them into drive and stress and how that can slow the
desensitization process. Tough call though. Do you eliminate getting
them into drive at all (basically cutting out all running type exercise
for awhile) in order to try to keep stress out of their bodies during
the process, or do you give them that outlet.
I think it depends on the dog.
Tara
Sionnach
"Tara" wrote:
> That's not UN-Christian.
I think it is. I'm using un-Christian in the sense of practices which are
counter to the teachings of Christ- such as "let he who is without sin cast
the first stone". (For those who don't know the quote, Jesus was defending a
woman accused of adultery.)
> Catholics don't even acknowledge divorce to a
> large degree.
The Catholic church has a long and rich history of un-Christian practices
and policies. That's one of the more minor ones, compared to the burning of
"heretics" and the protection of pedophiles.
shelly
Tara <tara....@verizon.net> typed:
> While I don't think the presence of anxiety is related to
> drive, I agree with Melissa here in that the *intensity* of
> the reactions and the overall impact sure are.
oh, absolutely! i think if harriet had the drive of an
intense BC, she would likely be more reactive and, frankly,
her issues would be more than i could handle.
> I know that Finn's reactions to his fear have always been
> directly related to whether or not his prey drive has been
> engaged.
that makes sense. the adrenalin rush that, with a normal dog,
is put to good use can be put to bad use when a dog is
fearful.
> Tough call though. Do you
> eliminate getting them into drive at all (basically cutting
> out all running type exercise for awhile) in order to try
> to keep stress out of their bodies during the process, or
> do you give them that outlet.
>
> I think it depends on the dog.
i agree, though my experience in this area is obviously
limited. i think that with many dogs, cutting out the sorts
of exercise that allows them to lower their stress level would
also increase stress (e.g. harriet--her off switch would get
horribly sprung if she didn't a regular, hard workout). some
dogs just don't cope well with relative inactivity. i can see
why others would benefit from lower-drive activity, though.
Tara
Well, see....I define Christian sects by what they actually do, not what
they'd like to do. And they've all got some rather awkward skeletons
lying around
But then I'm pretty Un-Christian myself
Not strong enough dislike to be "anti", certainly not strong enough like
to be "pro"....so I'll gladly take the label "Un"
;-)
Tara
Tara
> shelly (scouv...@bluemarble.net) wrote:
>
> : did you miss the post where she said that she knows of a
> : working BC who lives on a farm (IOW, he has the ideal living
> : environment) but still needs to be medicated?
>
> belongs to a behaviorist and lives out in the country on acreage. He is
> doing GREAT. But, he will always be on meds.
>
> I'm not sure that simply working Solo until he dropped would fix his
> problems, although sheep are a really useful counterconditioning tool.
> If he only ever encountered problem stimuli when he was around sheep, it
> would help facilitate his learning process. I'm not sure it would repair
> his brain.
Some people are more comfortable working through issues using all the
tools available, and others are more comfortable never addressing
potentially debilitating issues at all. One could choose to work through
fears, or one could choose to stay indoors where its quiet. One could
work through separation anxiety and build a dog's confidence, or one
could choose to just never be apart. I'm genuinely not being snarky as
there is no inherent nor implied moral preference in the above statements.
As long as ultimately the situation can be handled with the least
suffering and the difficulty/gain ratio makes sense, then its a matter
of what is the right choice for those actually *involved* in the
situation. Not just a matter of what a few finger pointers who have
their own issues triggered by your situation might think.
I think the biggest question is why bother continuously attacking a
situation that one doesn't even have a basic understanding of in
themselves, let alone for someone else's situation?
Tara
shelly
Melanie L Chang <mlc...@mail2.sas.upenn.edu> typed:
> The dog I referenced is not a working Border Collie. He is
> an Aussie who belongs to a behaviorist and lives out in the
> country on acreage. He is doing GREAT. But, he will
> always be on meds.
ah, my mistake. it still illustrates the point, though, that
some dogs may need to be on meds for the rest of their lives.
> If he only ever encountered
> problem stimuli when he was around sheep, it would help
> facilitate his learning process. I'm not sure it would
> repair his brain.
i don't imagine it would.
BethF
"Tara" <tara....@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:3E52577C...@verizon.net...
> BethF wrote:
>
> > I am not talking about what anyone said.
> >
> > I just asked you why you think folks cancel posts?
>
> It strikes me as disingenuous to try and bring the conversation into a
> general realm when he specifically stated that the specific context was
> what gave him that impression, Beth.
>
> People cancel posts for a lot of reasons. Some might do so out of
> embarrassment (as distinguished from remorse), some do so realizing
> the premise was faulty and therefore completely off topic, and yes,
> I'm quite sure people cancel them out of remorse (though usually an
> acknowledgment is a better hallmark of remorse than hiding the evidence).
I wouldn't argue that acknowledgement is a better hallmark than cancelling a
post and not acknowledging. But I would say that cancelling a post does
signal regret.
Tara
> I wouldn't argue that acknowledgement is a better hallmark than cancelling a
> post and not acknowledging. But I would say that cancelling a post does
> signal regret.
I think in some circumstances, it *can* signal regret. In others, it
decidedly doesn't. To speculate motive without getting into context is
kind of useless, IMO.
Tara
BethF
"Melissa S. Frye" <mf...@surfree.com> wrote in message
> And really, options for Solo are basically A. a needle or B. Life with
> Melanie medicated C. stuck in a foster home trying to find a suitable home
> with a farm sheep and owners willing to committee to long-term work on a
dog
> with issues (good luck).
I agree - Melanie saved a doomed dog. And while I respect people's opinions
that "drugs are bad and no drugs are good", I don't agree for dogs or
people. For some dogs and people "drugs are necessary". I also don't think
there is enough evidence to say whether living someplace other than in the
city would make Solo less in need of drugs. If he did live in on a farm he
certainly wouldn't have the opportunity to get used to traffic and people
and other dogs and trains like he does in philly.
> Solo is very lucky.
I know Melanie hates when people say this but I do agree - but Melanie is
also very, very lucky ;-)
Lynn K.
> I just asked you why you think folks cancel posts?
Because they don't want them read? A silver
bullet to used upon realizing that something
you said was unfortunate, to avoid having to
apologize for it? Every one of us has known
regret over ill-chosen words at some point.
We just witnessed a particularly unpleasant
incident, with immediate ownership taken by
Diddy. There isn't anything at all to be gained
by letting it spark piling on of more ugly
behavior. Let's all let it drop and keep our
opinions on the behavior of others to ourselves,
shall we?
(Beth, thanks for letting me reply to your post
as a springboard for the kind of pontificating
self-righteous group lecture I should be justly
criticized for.)
Lynn
Gwen Watson
"Lynn K." wrote:
> There isn't anything at all to be gained
> by letting it spark piling on of more ugly
> behavior.
Wonderful words. Thank you for this.
Gwen
diddy
> certainly wouldn't have the opportunity to get used to traffic and people
> and other dogs and trains like he does in philly.
traffic. They live in the country and get plenty of training. Why would
living in the country preclude him from those experiences?
I agree, Solo IS a lucky dog, in that Melanie tries her darndest to give
him the best quality of life she can under her current circumstances.
She is most definitively dedicated to him.
We all expected him to go back on medications when she returned, and he
did. It was the kindest thing for him under the circumstances.
What didn't happen that was also predicted (not stated by me) that she
would move him on once she got Fly. That, fortunately never happened. I
think giving him a companion dog was a kindness for him.
BethF
"Melanie L Chang" <mlc...@mail1.sas.upenn.edu> wrote in message
news:b2t9eh$b0ei$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
> BethF (be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com) wrote:
>
> : this seems uncharacteristically catty.
>
> Let me get this straight: you let diddy's characteristic behavior slide,
> and yet you complain about -Matt-? I'm baffled.
Diddy has a big mouth and has no idea when to stop typing sometimes. I know
that about her, and accept it, and I like her despite it. I don't agree
with her assessment of Solo and I certainly dont' think its any of her
business to post how she thinks he should live, unless asked. I am certain
there are folks here who would take issue with how I raise my dogs, but
unless I ask for advice about it, its not anyone's business.
I think you and others have done an excellent job of pointing that out - and
explaining whats offensive about it. However, as always I dont' think
this gives folks the right to behave just as badly.
BethF
"Lynn K." <jav...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:37cd72a9.03021...@posting.google.com...
> "BethF" <be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote in message news:
>
> > I just asked you why you think folks cancel posts?
>
> Because they don't want them read? A silver
> bullet to used upon realizing that something
> you said was unfortunate, to avoid having to
> apologize for it? Every one of us has known
> regret over ill-chosen words at some point.
>
> We just witnessed a particularly unpleasant
> incident, with immediate ownership taken by
> Diddy. There isn't anything at all to be gained
> by letting it spark piling on of more ugly
> behavior. Let's all let it drop and keep our
> opinions on the behavior of others to ourselves,
> shall we?
Yeh, What Lynn said.
> (Beth, thanks for letting me reply to your post
> as a springboard for the kind of pontificating
> self-righteous group lecture I should be justly
> criticized for.)
And thank YOU
BethF
"Dimpled Chad" <herr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:herringc-395CCF...@news.fu-berlin.de...
> In article <b2t9hi$1f7idp$1...@ID-39167.news.dfncis.de>,
> "shelly" <scouv...@bluemarble.net> wrote:
>
> > first of all, i don't recall Leah ever stating that her
> > minister got his/her ordination via mail. while i'm sure your
> > criticisms of your sister's church are valid, i do not think
> > it's fair to superimpose your own experience on Leah's church
> > or faith. that's a pretty big brush you're using, and it's
> > painting an ugly picture. you owe Leah an apology.
>
> I think that the above is correct; it is one thing to critique
> "ordination by mail," and I'd probably share your assessment of your
> sister's church. Leah's denomination, though, isn't necessarily part of
> the same kettle of fish...
FWIW, lots of folks here have issues with Leah's church and have posted
about it.
Dimpled Chad
"BethF" <da...@alaska.com> wrote:
>
> > Solo is very lucky.
>
> I know Melanie hates when people say this but I do agree - but Melanie is
> also very, very lucky ;-)
Being a relatively new person around here, it sounds like it to me,
too...
Chad (lucky to have Frankie)
--
Looking for a pet? Adopt one! ** http://www.petfinder.com
"An author doesn't necessarily understand the meaning of his own story
better than anyone else." C.S. Lewis
Dimpled Chad
"BethF" <da...@alaska.com> wrote:
Hi Beth,
Right, I'm aware of that and have some issues myself. My objection was
to the pejorative "back garage" applied to it, which seemed to me to be
uncalled for. I believe Diddy has atoned for her posts and they've made
up... That doesn't discount valid and reasonably held concerns that
anyone might have about her church. That's ones personal assessment, and
I'm sure its a two way street...
Piggybacking on the other posts: Christianity, or those bearing its
name, has been complicit in many many evils over its two thousand year
history, no doubt. Modern Christian groups have their share of problems,
some minor some major. Its my belief that these are symptoms of human
failings not the spirit that underlies the tradition (similar things
could be said, though in different degrees, about contemporary Islam and
Judaism, and perhaps some humanistic movements as well).
Chad
BethF
"Dimpled Chad" <herr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:herringc-
> Right, I'm aware of that and have some issues myself. My objection was
> to the pejorative "back garage" applied to it, which seemed to me to be
> uncalled for. I believe Diddy has atoned for her posts and they've made
> up... That doesn't discount valid and reasonably held concerns that
> anyone might have about her church. That's ones personal assessment, and
> I'm sure its a two way street...
I don't think this is the forum for discussions of reasonably held or valid
concerns about Leah's church unless she brings it up.
Dimpled Chad
"BethF" <da...@alaska.com> wrote:
I concur. That's the notion I was defending, kinda.
Thanks, Beth.
Lone Hansen
"diddy" <di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation> wrote in
message
news:3E52825D...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation...
> We all expected him to go back on medications when she returned, and he
> did. It was the kindest thing for him under the circumstances.
Diddy it seems that you somehow fail to see that for some dogs as well
as people drugs are vital. It has been proven over and over that some need
drugs for the rest of their life. Some feel so good and feel so stabile that
they stop taking their medication, they still feel good and think YEAH ! I
will continue not to take the medication and then WHAM it all goes down
hill.
Solo needs his medication to function properly. It is not a matter of
where he is or who he is with or what he is doing. To indicate that Solo or
anyone else who needs medication would be fine if in a different environment
shows a lack of understanding. In utopia everything would be black and
white, but in the real world grey areas exist.
Lone
diddy
Argue as you may, He WAS successful off medications until he returned to
the city. Whether he would have had to go back on medications had he
stayed where is was, is only speculative. Because this touches a nerve,
is the only reason you folks seem to wish to continue argueing.
BethF
"diddy" <di...@whoops.I.said.WHAT?> wrote in message news:pJw4a.9157
> Argue as you may, He WAS successful off medications until he returned to
> the city. Whether he would have had to go back on medications had he
> stayed where is was, is only speculative. Because this touches a nerve,
> is the only reason you folks seem to wish to continue argueing.
There are many reasons why he may have been successful off medication - we
simply don't know.
Lone Hansen
"diddy" <di...@whoops.I.said.WHAT?> wrote in message
> Lone Hansen wrote:
>
> Argue as you may, He WAS successful off medications until he returned to
> the city. Whether he would have had to go back on medications had he
> stayed where is was, is only speculative. Because this touches a nerve,
> is the only reason you folks seem to wish to continue argueing.
> --
> just diddy
> "I have no direct experience with this, but in my opinion...."
> to be applied to all previous statements
- Following your logic then it is only speculative that he would have
been able to stay of medication if he had stayed on the farm. I don't see
why it is so hard to understand that dogs on medication can function of the
medication for a while but not long term.
What I don't understand is your somewhat broad statement that
environment will cure all. That is so untrue. Most diseases can't be cured
by a shift in environment, and to state that a chemical unbalance in the
brain will be magically cured by an environmental change is far of the mark.
What touches a nerve in me is your assumptions of how to deal with
diseases. I am sure that the people who knows Solo and what is wrong with
him are far better equipped to diagnose him than you are. To me is seems
dangerous to state that everything can be cured without medication.
Lone
Leah
>I also tend to react to
>something, and fire, rather than to assess whether what I am reacting to
>was interpretted correctly. This is a huge failing on my part. I can
>see, I am not alone in this weakness.
Uh, no. I think I can jump in the same barrel as you on that one. In fact, I
think that's how I get into most of my trouble.
>You are a big person to be able to accept my apology after the way I
>have treated you.
No, I'm only 4'11". Well, 4'11-3/4", to be exact. :}
Thank you, but I'm not such a nice person. I'm just not that easy to insult.
And I get over it. I could be extremely nasty when I was younger, most of the
time justifying that I was just "being honest," so I can also see it from the
other side.
I had a most profound life lesson on forgiveness and how people can change.
When I was in my early 20s, my closest friend in the world betrayed me by lying
to me and stealing from me. I can't describe how shocked, hurt, and angry I
became. I went so far as to stalk her, and I set her up for a beating from
another person I manipulated.
About 5 years later, I got a phone call from this friend. She said she wanted
to fly down (from MI to NY) to talk to me. I figured sure, let her step off
the plane and start throwing bull at me, and she can step right back on it.
She confessed all. She had no excuse. (Actually, she did - one that made
sense to me later, but she didn't claim it.) She asked for my forgiveness.
Linda was the most loyal, trustworthy, and close friend I ever had, up until
her death a few years ago. If there is such a thing as a soul sister, she was
it. If I had not forgiven her, I'd have sacrificed one of the most - if not
the most - profound relationships of my life.
PetsMart Pet Trainer
See My Furry Family At:
http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/dogs0
diddy
I didn't SAY that. You interject words and theories and make them mine.
MElanie brought up Solo, and so I used him as the case.
The fact that he was successful in a new environment doing the work he
was bred to do, off medications spoke to me. The fact that you don't
like the conclusion, I'm not responsible for.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Incidentally I am not the ONLY person who has come to that conclusion,
they just prefer not to make this thread any uglier than it had gotten.
I'm just guilty for speaking what I thought/think and continue to think.
It wasn't intended to be snarky, it was a statement. It was everyone
taking things out of context and interjecting their own thoughts that
made it so.
This IS a discussion group. And She wanted to discuss it, and I did.
Apparently this is only a discussion group if you speak the thoughts of
the masses.
michael
diddy wrote:
> Leah wrote:
>
>>>diddy di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation wrote:
>>>i have a sister that seemed to have found a
>>>religion just like it when she was in Florida.
>>>Seems she had an affair witrh her minister, had his baby. Divorced her
>>>husband. Found out the minister had a baby by a 14 year old girl, and
>>>left. She then remarried her husband, then had an affair with the deacon
>>>in the church, had his baby, all the while her husband was having an
>>>affair with the ministers wife, and they mutually got divorced and went
>>>with their partners. All justified and condoned by the church. They are
>>>truly religious. You wouldn't believe the nasty comments exchanged
>>>because I'm not a believer in their true religion.
>>>*sheesh* You gotta watch those Florida grassroots ministries. No more
>>>evangelical miracles ever happened more than within their walls. I just
>>>happen to be a skeptic.
>>
>>I didn't know Protestant was considered grassroots. :}
>>
>>In any church I know around here, none of those people would be allowed to hold
>>positions of power if they carried on like that. If they didn't repent, they
>>may not even be allowed back to the church.
>>
>>In some churches, even divorced people aren't allowed to hold positions within
>>the church.
>>
>>PetsMart Pet Trainer
>>See My Furry Family At:
>>http://www.angelfire.com/fl5/dogs0
>
>
> Leah,
> I agree that I was wrong. I was equating your previous justifications,
> and flipping the continuity page with explaination of miracles, all
> based on religion. This triggered an awful monster in me, over
> frustrations with my sister, who does all these, to me, awful things,
> and justifies them all. She's sanctimonious and rabidly self rightious.
> You do not beat us to death with your religion, and I believe you are a
> very kind person. If your religion gives you inner peace, I'm glad you
> found it. I got triggered by a sister, who reminds me a lot of you in
> many ways and applied what i know of her, and all the ugly frustrations
> i have with her oozed all over my picture of you. Boy was i out of line.
> You are in no way connected with my sister, or her religion, and boy
> was I way out there.
> I really was upset with myself last night in my treatment of you and
> sorted out a lot of things about what exactly pushes my buttons about
> you, and it always came down to my sister. Gosh, you never met the
> woman, you certainly can't be responsible for my repressed and deeply
> seated angst about her.
> You aren't responsible for any of the things that trigger my snark
> meter about you. They are seriously misplaced, and I don't expect you to
> accept my apology, for I have been wickedly evil to you. I promise to
> try to do better.
> On a good note, I discovered a lot of things that have been repressed
> in soul searching, that i hope i can apply towards my sister, and
> perhaps maybe create a bridge to reach her.
> I know this is of little consequence to you, and you were my victim.
> I hope you continue to enjoy your doggies, and I know you adore them
> very much, and they are your world. I identify with that. I hope we can
> start over.
>
> I hope we can start over.
Now say that to the cats and the coyotes.
--
this is michael
reporting live...
http://dogtv.com
with the all
new & exciting
dogtv.com couchcam
Gwen Watson
Lone Hansen wrote:
> "diddy" <di...@whoops.I.said.WHAT?> wrote in message
> news:pJw4a.9157$37.11...@cletus.bright.net...
> > Lone Hansen wrote:
> >
> > Argue as you may, He WAS successful off medications until he returned to
> > the city. Whether he would have had to go back on medications had he
> > stayed where is was, is only speculative. Because this touches a nerve,
> > is the only reason you folks seem to wish to continue argueing.
> > --
> > just diddy
> > "I have no direct experience with this, but in my opinion...."
> > to be applied to all previous statements
>
> - Following your logic then it is only speculative that he would have
> been able to stay of medication if he had stayed on the farm. I don't see
> why it is so hard to understand that dogs on medication can function of the
> medication for a while but not long term.
>
>
But there are other methods to consider at times. I just hate
the "mother's little helper" society we seem to have become.
Mick definitely had it down when he wrote that song.
Here is site that refers to cognitive behavior therapy.
http://www.cognitive-behavior-therapy.org/
http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/info/factsheets/pfaccog.htm
http://www.bioneurofeedback.com/
Though I realize some things can't be cured without meds, I also
no there is no such thing as a "magic" little white pill that cures
everything without additional work and therapy. Many of the
people I know on these meds don't go to therapy they just
eat the pills everyday. I have issues with this as one is not
learning how to relearn how to deal with certain problems that
arise in life.
But I agree that lots of times meds are needed, and will have to be continued
through life and often times enviroment will not make a difference.
Just a thought.
Gwen
michael
diddy wrote:
> Leah wrote:
>
>>Diddy, I am in tears right now. IMHO, the slate is wiped completely clean.
>
> Leah, I am in tears also, I had great remorse last night in my treatment
> of you. I'm glad you took my apology at face value. It was sincere.
> Heres a hankie. Heck, here's the box if you will share it with me.
> *hugs*((((Leah)))*hugs*
>
>>See, miracles happen every day. :}
>
> Yeah they do.
If only Travis were here to see the fruits of his selflessness and true
Christian labor. He may be gone now, but the bridges he built stand as a
testament to his faith and perseverance.
diddy
I find it interesting that you mention this since I never asked for, or
expected an apology from you. You are too self centered, egotistical,
and insecure for that. It's not possible for you to do so.
Solo is simply an accessory for your ego. In your world of fashion and
style.
The fact that you cant comment on anything unless it surrounds you, your
successes, or style is indicative of this. Solo gains you attention. You
NEED him, for it's the only kind of hero you can ever be. You saved him,
and the reason you react so to any sort of negativism, is because your
fragile lotus flower can't sustain the damage that you know to be true.
Your posts are "YOU" inclusive, or snark. You don't know how to
communicate any other way. You deserve respect because of your
education, you can't accept anything except total destruction of
sopmeone you feel a threat.
The fact you bring up the apology issue is surprising, because that
indicates to me that you did feel one was owed, but you couldn't find it
in your heart to do it. I can accept that.
Some people are so concerned with themselves they don't even see other
people. Your attitude is completely blind, and will always take any
kind of contradiction as an attack. Your education is failing you.
I've always thought that it didn't much matter what you studied in
college as long as you studied something because basically you should be
learning how to think about everything. how to research, how to ask
questions and how to answer them. Critical thinking. Unbiased. Be able
to approach something without preconceived ideas and come to conclusions
without prejudice. You haven't gotten to this point, and I think alot of
it is wrapped up in your identity problem. You are defensive and afraid,
and can't see around the fear yet.
You are self centered, and egotistical, that everything posted, you
assume paranoicly to relate to you. whether it applies or not.You are
obsessed with material things, and appearances. You just can't seem to
grasp abstracts. If posters aren't cooing and complimenting you, you are
unhappy. Very sad person.
And no, now I've said this, I won't apologize, for facing the truth,
perhaps it will help you to grow. You wouldn't accept an apology
anyway. I've said my peace, and won't respond any more on this topic
Gwen Watson
Ever read the book or see the movie "Valley of the Dolls"?
Gwen
diddy
>
> Ever read the book or see the movie "Valley of the Dolls"?
>
> Gwen
nope
Charlie Wilkes
>In article <3E51A297...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation>,
>diddy <di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation> wrote:
>>JEWISH mother? Is this the fad religion of the day?
>
>Uh, Diddy? She *was* raised by a Jewish mother.
Now she's being a Jewish mother to 3 neurotic dogs, teaching them to
hate themselves for making her suffer. And you're being mean to her,
Ms. Strap-On Gurl. I know because I've been lurking. Shame on you.
Charlie
Marcel Beaudoin
news:kq755v01jv2ium1la...@4ax.com:
>
> teaching them to
> hate themselves for making her suffer.
All dogs teach their owners to hate themselves. Moogli is convinced that we
are being cruel to him by not letting him at stuff we take away. If he can
see the edge of the bag of bacon treats, he will sit, stare at it, and
growl and whine until we hide it.
Marcel
Melinda Shore
Melanie L Chang <mlc...@mail2.sas.upenn.edu> wrote:
>Who exactly is "we all?" Did you take some sort of straw poll while I
>was gone or something?
This "we" didn't know that he'd be taken off his medication
while you were away. I thought you didn't, either?
--
Melinda Shore - Software longa, hardware brevis - sh...@panix.com
If you send me harassing email, I'll probably post it
Gwen Watson
diddy wrote:
It's about all these women on prescriptions meds they
abused but were prescribed readily
by the dozens for sleep disorders(very true, ie Marilyn Monroe)
and stress and anxiety, such as seconal, tuinal, deputal sp??.
Oh yeah, those meds have been
long replaced by something else since once
again if anyone gets wind there is a "street value"
ie kids and people using scripts to get high on them
they are often quickly replaced with a newer better
drug that hopefully people can't obtain a high on.
Ie Ritalin is highly likely on its way out. Once a
medication is being snorted and shot-up by
drug users you can just about count on it being
discontinued soon and replaced with something
new that is suppose to be better. I hear tales that
kids pay $15.00 per one ritalin pill. I can forsee
the ritalin days are nearing to an end.
Gwen
diddy
to, but everytime we mend bridges, usually on someone elses efforts, she
waits until the bridges are loaded and knocks the pilings out from under
it, and then claims being superior because of her religion. She's the
only right one.
I won't continue on my sister.....
filly
"Gwen Watson" <gw...@ig.utexas.edu> wrote in message
news:3E529EE3...@ig.utexas.edu...
<snip>
> the "mother's little helper" society we seem to have become.
>
> Mick definitely had it down when he wrote that song.
>
> Gwen
>
>
Did Mick Jaegger write that song? I thought it was a Beattles song.
Karla
Lone Hansen
> the "mother's little helper" society we seem to have become.
- True, in some cases medication is taking without thought for what is
to come. Which is sad, and very very disturbing. At the same time we mustn't
fail to see the need for medication in many different situations. If we as a
society refuses to see the need for medication it will have terrible
consequenses for the people involved. Sometimes we even have to see the need
for medicating people who can't see that they need it themselves. Drugs used
wrongly is terrible and can have devastating effects, on the other hand some
need it due to pain, mental illness, chemical unbalance and lots of other
things.
When someone resorts to drugs because he/she is unhappy or lonely or
because the children have to much energy for the parents to cope with, then
we are on the wrong track. It sadly seems though that it becomes more and
more normal to just take something for "it" rather than to work with it. I
think that a major factor today is that many people feel very, very lonely
and therefore they are depressed. Or they are to busy to cope with the
family and the needs of the people around them
>
> Mick definitely had it down when he wrote that song.
>
> Here is site that refers to cognitive behavior therapy.
>
> http://www.cognitive-behavior-therapy.org/
>
> http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/info/factsheets/pfaccog.htm
>
> http://www.bioneurofeedback.com/
>
> Though I realize some things can't be cured without meds, I also
> no there is no such thing as a "magic" little white pill that cures
> everything without additional work and therapy. Many of the
> people I know on these meds don't go to therapy they just
> eat the pills everyday. I have issues with this as one is not
> learning how to relearn how to deal with certain problems that
> arise in life.
>
> But I agree that lots of times meds are needed, and will have to be
continued
> through life and often times enviroment will not make a difference.
>
>
> Just a thought.
>
> Gwen
Lone
Sionnach
"diddy" wrote:
> The fact that he was successful in a new environment doing the work he
> was bred to do, off medications spoke to me.
Diddy, that speaks to ME that you don't know much about medications for
chemical brain imbalances. They usually take TIME to work - they have to
build up in the system. Likewise, in many cases it also takes time for them
to STOP working.
Additionally, some chemical brain imbalances are cyclical.
And you, of ALL people, should damn well understand that A. there's such a
thing as innate dysfunctions and B. that environment cannot overcome
everything. Let me ask you this: if there had been a drug that would have
changed the way your adopted son behaved- that would have allowed him to be
basically normal- would you have given it to him?
Sionnach
"Melanie L Chang" <mlc...@mail2.sas.upenn.edu> wrote in message
news:b2u6s2$bkn8$1...@netnews.upenn.edu...
> diddy (di...@scared.to.death.with.our.political.situation) wrote:
>
> : We all expected him to go back on medications when she returned, and he
> ^^^^^^
> Who exactly is "we all?" Did you take some sort of straw poll while I
> was gone or something?
No, and it's bullshit in any case. Nobody here knew he was going to be off
his medications, so nobody could have "expected him to go back on"! How
could we have, when IIRC YOU didn't know the trainer was going to do that??
Tara
> "diddy" wrote:
>
>
>>The fact that he was successful in a new environment doing the work he
>>was bred to do, off medications spoke to me.
>
>
> Diddy, that speaks to ME that you don't know much about medications for
> chemical brain imbalances. They usually take TIME to work - they have to
> build up in the system. Likewise, in many cases it also takes time for them
> to STOP working.
I have already pointed this out to her. She said that was new
information and changed things. Apparently those "things" must have
changed back in the last day.
> Additionally, some chemical brain imbalances are cyclical.
Very much so.
> And you, of ALL people, should damn well understand that A. there's such a
> thing as innate dysfunctions and B. that environment cannot overcome
> everything. Let me ask you this: if there had been a drug that would have
> changed the way your adopted son behaved- that would have allowed him to be
> basically normal- would you have given it to him?
Good point.
Tara
Lone Hansen
"filly" <fi...@expert.net> wrote in message
news:v55c761...@corp.supernews.com...
Lone(who very much likes the Rolling Stones)
Sionnach
"diddy" wrote:
> Argue as you may, He WAS successful off medications until he returned to
> the city.
1. Without the medication and the work Melanie did *prior* to him going
to the trainer, I don't think he'd have been successful there. He didn't go
the the trainer and all of sudden get better.
2.IIRC, the trainer "weaned him off" the medication. He didn't just
suddenly stop giving it. Medications like that often take TIME to work, and
TIME to wear off once they're stopped.
3. Solo didn't suddenly regress when he was back in the city- IIRC what
Melanie wrote, it crept up on him. Not to mention that he didn't revert all
they back to the way he was pre-medication and prior to the work Melanie's
done with him; IIRC, he just started getting a bit jumpy about sounds etc.
again.
4. Chemical brain disfunctions can be cyclical. (Don't know if they are in
Solo's case, but the possiblity exists.) Chemical brain disfunctions
generally CANNOT be 100% controlled by environment. If brain disfunctions
could be 100% controlled by environment, you would not have had the problems
you've repeatedly told us about with your son.
Last but far from least- yeah, Solo was "successful off medications"- in a
very limited and controlled environment, away from his home and his owner.
Which would you choose for Danny- living a medication-free, limited life
in a controlled environment, without you, or living with you, on medication?
Sionnach
"Tara" wrote:
>
> Well, see....I define Christian sects
You're still not understanding what I said. I'm not defining Christian
sects. I'm defining un-Christian behaviour; behaving in ways that are
counter to the teachings of Christ, whether or not a particular Christian
sect approves of such behaviour.
>by what they actually do, not what
> they'd like to do.
Erm, while the Catholic church's burning of heretics is past history,
protection of pedophiles is NOT. Nor is the ritual beating of children in
some evangelical Protestant sects, or the "shunning" of adulterers, etc. in
others.
> And they've all got some rather awkward skeletons
> lying around
I don't think current ugly policies- whether official, like "shunning", or
unofficial, like protecting a vicious pedophile because he's related to
somebody high up in the diocese- in ANY religion, can be called "skeletons
in the closet".
> But then I'm pretty Un-Christian myself
> Not strong enough dislike to be "anti", certainly not strong enough like
> to be "pro"....so I'll gladly take the label "Un"
Heh. I'm not a Christian, but my parents are. And you wouldn't want to
take the label "Un-Christian" as my Mam uses it, and as I am using it.
Did you ever read the Narnia books?
Sionnach
"filly" wrote:
.
> >
> > Mick definitely had it down when he wrote that song.
>
> >
> > Gwen
> >
> >
> Did Mick Jaegger write that song?
I'm not sure who actually WROTE it, but he SANG it.
I thought it was a Beattles song.
>
Nope. That's a Stones song.
filly
"Lone Hansen" <lo...@zorland.net> wrote in message
news:b2udee$npk$1...@newsg3.svr.pol.co.uk...
<snip>
> > -Nope it is a Rolling Stones' song
>
>
> Lone(who very much likes the Rolling Stones)
>
>
tell how old I am by looking at them)
Sionnach
"Melanie L Chang" wrote:
> Solo remained on
> the medication until one of my trainer's other students -- who is a
> "drugs are oogie" person -- talked him into taking Solo off of them.
Huh. I'd "oogie" her!! That's really, really, really inappropriate, IMO.
Theresa Willis
<be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote:
>
>
>I just asked you why you think folks cancel posts?
>
To confuse the Duct Tape Illuminati.
Christy
"diddy" <di...@whoops.I.said.WHAT?> wrote in message
> Your posts are "YOU" inclusive, or snark. You don't know how to
> communicate any other way.
<snip>
> Some people are so concerned with themselves they don't even see other
> people. Your attitude is completely blind, and will always take any
> kind of contradiction as an attack.
<snip>
>You are defensive and afraid,
> and can't see around the fear yet.
> You are self centered, and egotistical, that everything posted, you
> assume paranoicly to relate to you. whether it applies or not.
<snip>
>Very sad person.
My dear mother postulates that in interpreting a dream, everyone in it is
actually a reflection of yourself.
I wonder if the same holds true for newsgroup postings.
Christy
BethF
"Theresa Willis" <tdwi...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:eur55vglt786rjmef...@4ax.com...
Oh crap, I forgot about them.
montana
"filly" <fi...@expert.net> wrote:
No. Come on, I've seen better looking dead people.
Sionnach
"montana" wrote:
>
> No. Come on, I've seen better looking dead people.
Ah, but none that can make a guitar sing like Keith! (Too bad he's never,
AFIAK, done an acoustic blues album.)