The nurses at Southview ROCK!
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
Sunday, March 27, 2005
It started out as what seemed to be a typical Saturday.
I went to work to do some homework at about 8am. We went out to run errands at about noon. Amy started to have random contractions at about 2pm. By 4pm they were 5 minutes apart. By 5 we were at the hospital. The contractions were lasting for a minute every 3 minutes. She was at 5cm and 80%. They decided to admit her at about half past 5. At 6:55pm our new daughter, Hadassah Ruth Williams joned our family for time and all eternity.
She is a few weeks early so they are watching her and helping her breathe a bit. She should be home in about a week.
Esther 2:7
"And he brought up Hadassah, that is, Esther, ....and the maid was fair and beautiful..."
She is a few weeks early so they are watching her and helping her breathe a bit. She should be home in about a week.
Esther 2:7
"And he brought up Hadassah, that is, Esther, ....and the maid was fair and beautiful..."
Friday, March 25, 2005
Viernes Santo
When I was a kid, I always thought Good Friday was good because you were finally allowed to eat meat. Which is what I did today. Jaisen got up early this morning and accompanied me to a local reseaturant wherein we partook of their all-you-can-eat breakfast buffet. Mmm,Mmm,Pork! (Jaisen had as much watermelon as I had sausage.) It was muy bueno!
I am only at work today until lunch. We have the Pinewood derby tonight. It will be fun but kinda sad too. It is my last Pack meeting as Cubmaster. They have a great new guy coming in and I look forward to working with him tonight and in the future.
After I get off of work this afternoon we are going to meet up with our friends the Guinthers to do a little shopping. I am looking for some new pants. They need to be on the cheap though. So it should turn out to be a very good Friday.
I have a good deal of homework to catchup on this weekend. I will be very busy Saturday morning. It is usually my freak-out time where I scramble to get the work done. Will be trying to putting up some pics this weekend.
I am only at work today until lunch. We have the Pinewood derby tonight. It will be fun but kinda sad too. It is my last Pack meeting as Cubmaster. They have a great new guy coming in and I look forward to working with him tonight and in the future.
After I get off of work this afternoon we are going to meet up with our friends the Guinthers to do a little shopping. I am looking for some new pants. They need to be on the cheap though. So it should turn out to be a very good Friday.
I have a good deal of homework to catchup on this weekend. I will be very busy Saturday morning. It is usually my freak-out time where I scramble to get the work done. Will be trying to putting up some pics this weekend.
Thursday, March 24, 2005
The quotable Eisenhower
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, signifies in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed."
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
- Dwight D. Eisenhower
Wednesday, March 23, 2005
Windows, Windows, WINDOWS!!! revisited
They are in and they look great! I cannot believe what a difference they make. We could BARELY hear the rain last night. It was windy out and their was no rattling. The trains in the distance could only be heard by their whistles. Amy did not get any pics of them going in, but I of course have pictures of them already done. I will try to post them by the end of this weekend. I am so excited because this is the last job that we will need to pay someone else to do. The house is coming along slowly but surely.
This baby is gonna be big! Amy is GREAT with child! We have not heard anything from Jeanette about her baby yet. I think she is due this week.
Mikey is feeling better but not quite up to par yet. Looking forward to spending some time with the fam this weekend. Jaisen is excited about looking for easter eggs. There will be pics of that too.
This baby is gonna be big! Amy is GREAT with child! We have not heard anything from Jeanette about her baby yet. I think she is due this week.
Mikey is feeling better but not quite up to par yet. Looking forward to spending some time with the fam this weekend. Jaisen is excited about looking for easter eggs. There will be pics of that too.
Tuesday, March 22, 2005
Let them eat cake!
Law Bush signed as Texas governor prompts cries of hypocrisy
BY WILLIAM DOUGLAS
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - (KRT) - The federal law that President Bush signed early Monday in an effort to prolong Terri Schiavo's life appears to contradict a right-to-die law that he signed as Texas governor, prompting cries of hypocrisy from congressional Democrats and some bioethicists.
In 1999, then-Gov. Bush signed the Advance Directives Act, which lets a patient's surrogate make life-ending decisions on his or her behalf. The measure also allows Texas hospitals to disconnect patients from life-sustaining systems if a physician, in consultation with a hospital bioethics committee, concludes that the patient's condition is hopeless.
Bioethicists familiar with the Texas law said Monday that if the Schiavo case had occurred in Texas, her husband would be the legal decision-maker and, because he and her doctors agreed that she had no hope of recovery, her feeding tube would be disconnected.
'The Texas law signed in 1999 allowed next of kin to decide what the patient wanted, if competent,' said John Robertson, a University of Texas bioethicist.
While Congress and the White House were considering legislation recently in the Schiavo case, Bush's Texas law faced its first high-profile test. With the permission of a judge, a Houston hospital disconnected a critically ill infant from his breathing tube last week against his mother's wishes after doctors determined that continuing life support would be futile.
"The mother down in Texas must be reading the Schiavo case and scratching her head," said Dr. Howard Brody, the director of Michigan State University's Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences. "This does appear to be a contradiction."
Brody said that, in taking up the Schiavo case, Bush and Congress had shattered a body of bioethics law and practice.
"This is crazy. It's political grandstanding," he said.
Bush's apparent shift on right-to-die decisions wasn't lost on Democrats. During heated debate on the Schiavo case, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., accused Bush of hypocrisy.
"It appears that President Bush felt, as governor, that there was a point which, when doctors felt there was no further hope for the patient, that it is appropriate for an end-of-life decision to be made, even over the objection of family members," Wasserman Schultz said. "There is an obvious conflict here between the president's feelings on this matter now as compared to when he was governor of Texas."
White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan termed Wasserman Schultz's remarks "uninformed accusations" and denied that there was any conflict in Bush's positions on the two laws.
"The legislation he signed (early Monday) is consistent with his views," McClellan said. "The (1999) legislation he signed into law actually provided new protections for patients ... prior to the passage of the '99 legislation that he signed, there were no protections."
Wasserman Schultz stuck by her remarks when told of McClellan's comments.
"It's a fact in black and white," she said. "It's a direct conflict on the position he has in the Schiavo case."
Tom Mayo, a Southern Methodist University Law School associate professor who helped draft the Texas law, said he saw no inconsistency in Bush's stands.
"It's not really a conflict, because the (Texas) law addresses different types of disputes, meaning the dispute between decision-maker and physician," he said. "The Schiavo case is a disagreement among family members."
Bush himself framed the Schiavo decision this way Monday.
"This is a complex case with serious issues, but in extraordinary circumstances like this, it is wise to always err on the side of life," the president said during a Social Security event in Tucson, Ariz. He didn't mention the 1999 Texas law.
BY WILLIAM DOUGLAS
Knight Ridder Newspapers
WASHINGTON - (KRT) - The federal law that President Bush signed early Monday in an effort to prolong Terri Schiavo's life appears to contradict a right-to-die law that he signed as Texas governor, prompting cries of hypocrisy from congressional Democrats and some bioethicists.
In 1999, then-Gov. Bush signed the Advance Directives Act, which lets a patient's surrogate make life-ending decisions on his or her behalf. The measure also allows Texas hospitals to disconnect patients from life-sustaining systems if a physician, in consultation with a hospital bioethics committee, concludes that the patient's condition is hopeless.
Bioethicists familiar with the Texas law said Monday that if the Schiavo case had occurred in Texas, her husband would be the legal decision-maker and, because he and her doctors agreed that she had no hope of recovery, her feeding tube would be disconnected.
'The Texas law signed in 1999 allowed next of kin to decide what the patient wanted, if competent,' said John Robertson, a University of Texas bioethicist.
While Congress and the White House were considering legislation recently in the Schiavo case, Bush's Texas law faced its first high-profile test. With the permission of a judge, a Houston hospital disconnected a critically ill infant from his breathing tube last week against his mother's wishes after doctors determined that continuing life support would be futile.
"The mother down in Texas must be reading the Schiavo case and scratching her head," said Dr. Howard Brody, the director of Michigan State University's Center for Ethics and Humanities in the Life Sciences. "This does appear to be a contradiction."
Brody said that, in taking up the Schiavo case, Bush and Congress had shattered a body of bioethics law and practice.
"This is crazy. It's political grandstanding," he said.
Bush's apparent shift on right-to-die decisions wasn't lost on Democrats. During heated debate on the Schiavo case, Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, D-Fla., accused Bush of hypocrisy.
"It appears that President Bush felt, as governor, that there was a point which, when doctors felt there was no further hope for the patient, that it is appropriate for an end-of-life decision to be made, even over the objection of family members," Wasserman Schultz said. "There is an obvious conflict here between the president's feelings on this matter now as compared to when he was governor of Texas."
White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan termed Wasserman Schultz's remarks "uninformed accusations" and denied that there was any conflict in Bush's positions on the two laws.
"The legislation he signed (early Monday) is consistent with his views," McClellan said. "The (1999) legislation he signed into law actually provided new protections for patients ... prior to the passage of the '99 legislation that he signed, there were no protections."
Wasserman Schultz stuck by her remarks when told of McClellan's comments.
"It's a fact in black and white," she said. "It's a direct conflict on the position he has in the Schiavo case."
Tom Mayo, a Southern Methodist University Law School associate professor who helped draft the Texas law, said he saw no inconsistency in Bush's stands.
"It's not really a conflict, because the (Texas) law addresses different types of disputes, meaning the dispute between decision-maker and physician," he said. "The Schiavo case is a disagreement among family members."
Bush himself framed the Schiavo decision this way Monday.
"This is a complex case with serious issues, but in extraordinary circumstances like this, it is wise to always err on the side of life," the president said during a Social Security event in Tucson, Ariz. He didn't mention the 1999 Texas law.
Windows, Windows, WINDOWS!!!
I spoke with amy a few minutes ago and the window guys were pulling into the driveway. I asked her to take some pics so we will see how it turns out. I am so excited that we will have one more thing checked off of the list. Pics will be available on the picspage. (eventually)Mikey has been feeling a little worse for wear for the past few days. he seems to becoming out of it though. El vomito, la diarrhea.
Saturday, March 19, 2005
Friday, March 18, 2005
Finally Friday
Work has been cool and all, it is just great to have the weekends off. Amy and I are going to an activity at church tonight. It should be fun. We are going out to get a bite to eat and then an evening of dancing. A few of our friends should be there so we will have a good time. this weekend looks pretty good in spite of the pending rain.
Thursday, March 17, 2005
Wednesday, March 16, 2005
I guess We need to get up there soon. ANWR
HEADLINE: Senate votes to open oil drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
BYLINE: By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
BODY:
Amid the backdrop of soaring oil and gasoline prices, a sharply divided Senate on Wednesday voted to open the ecologically rich Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling, delivering a major energy policy win for President Bush.The Senate, by a 51-49 vote, rejected an attempt by Democrats and GOP moderates to remove a refuge drilling provision from next year's budget, preventing opponents from using a filibuster - a tactic that has blocked repeated past attempts to open the Alaska refuge to oil companies.The action, assuming Congress agrees on a budget, clears the way for approving drilling in the refuge later this year, drilling supporters said. The House has not included a similar provision in its budget, so the issue is still subject to negotiations later this year to resolve the difference. The oil industry has sought for more than two decades to get access to what is believed to be billions of barrels of oil beneath the 1.5 million-acre coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in the northern eastern corner of Alaska.Drilling supporters acknowledged after the vote that for refuge development to get final approval Congress must still pass a final budget with the Senate provision included, something Congress was unable to do last year.Still, "this is a big step," said Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who said he had tried for 24 years to open the refuge, but failed because Democrats blocked the effort through filibusters. The budget is immune from a filibuster, meaning drilling supporters will need only a majority - not the 60 votes required to break a filibuster - to succeed when the issue comes up for final action later this year.Environmentalists have fought such development and argued that despite improve environmental controls a web of pipelines and drilling platforms would harm calving caribou, polar bears and millions of migratory birds that use the coastal plain.Bush has called tapping the reserve's oil a critical part of the nation's energy security and a way to reduce America's reliance on imported oil, which account for more than half of the 20 million barrels of crude use daily.It's "a way to get some additional reserves here at home on the books," Bush said Wednesday.The Alaska refuge could supply as much as 1 million barrels day at peak production, drilling supporters said. But they acknowledge that even if ANWR's oil is tapped, it would have no impact on soaring oil prices and tight supplies. The first lease sales would not be issued until 2007, followed by development seven to 10 years later, Interior Secretary Gale Norton said."We won't see this oil for 10 years. It will have minimal impact," argued Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., a co-sponsor of the amendment that would have stripped the arctic refuge provision from the budget document. It is "foolish to say oil development and a wildlife refuge can coexist," she said.Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., argued that more oil would be saved if Congress enacted an energy policy focusing on conservation, more efficient cars and trucks and increased reliance on renewable fuels and expanded oil development in the deep-water Gulf where there are significant reserves."The fact is (drilling in ANWR) is going to be destructive," said Kerry.But drilling proponents argued that modern drilling technology can safeguard the refuge and still tap the likely - though not yet certain - 10.4 billion barrels of crude in the refuge.The vote Wednesday contrasted with the last time the Senate took up the ANWR drilling issue two years ago. Then, an attempt to include it in the budget was defeated. But drilling supporters gained strength last November when Republicans picked up three additional seats, all senators who favored drilling in the refuge.Opponents of drilling complained that Republicans this time were trying "an end run" by attaching the refuge provisions to the budget, a tactic that would allow the measure to pass with a majority vote.The 19-million-acre refuge was set aside for protection by President Eisenhower in 1960, but Congress in 1980 said its 1.5 million acre coastal plain could be opened to oil development if Congress specifically authorizes it.The House has repeatedly passed measures over the years to allow drilling in ANWR only to see the legislation stalled in the Senate. But last week, the House refused to include an ANWR provision in its budget document, although any differences between the Senate and House versions would likely be resolved in negotiations.Drilling supporters argued that access to the refuge's oil was a matter of national security and that modern drilling technology would protect the region's wildlife.Environmentalists contended that while new technologies have reduced the drilling footprint, ANWR's coastal plain still would contain a spider web of pipelines that would disrupt calving caribou and disturb polar bears, musk oxen and the annual influx of millions of migratory birds.
BYLINE: By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
BODY:
Amid the backdrop of soaring oil and gasoline prices, a sharply divided Senate on Wednesday voted to open the ecologically rich Alaska wildlife refuge to oil drilling, delivering a major energy policy win for President Bush.The Senate, by a 51-49 vote, rejected an attempt by Democrats and GOP moderates to remove a refuge drilling provision from next year's budget, preventing opponents from using a filibuster - a tactic that has blocked repeated past attempts to open the Alaska refuge to oil companies.The action, assuming Congress agrees on a budget, clears the way for approving drilling in the refuge later this year, drilling supporters said. The House has not included a similar provision in its budget, so the issue is still subject to negotiations later this year to resolve the difference. The oil industry has sought for more than two decades to get access to what is believed to be billions of barrels of oil beneath the 1.5 million-acre coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in the northern eastern corner of Alaska.Drilling supporters acknowledged after the vote that for refuge development to get final approval Congress must still pass a final budget with the Senate provision included, something Congress was unable to do last year.Still, "this is a big step," said Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who said he had tried for 24 years to open the refuge, but failed because Democrats blocked the effort through filibusters. The budget is immune from a filibuster, meaning drilling supporters will need only a majority - not the 60 votes required to break a filibuster - to succeed when the issue comes up for final action later this year.Environmentalists have fought such development and argued that despite improve environmental controls a web of pipelines and drilling platforms would harm calving caribou, polar bears and millions of migratory birds that use the coastal plain.Bush has called tapping the reserve's oil a critical part of the nation's energy security and a way to reduce America's reliance on imported oil, which account for more than half of the 20 million barrels of crude use daily.It's "a way to get some additional reserves here at home on the books," Bush said Wednesday.The Alaska refuge could supply as much as 1 million barrels day at peak production, drilling supporters said. But they acknowledge that even if ANWR's oil is tapped, it would have no impact on soaring oil prices and tight supplies. The first lease sales would not be issued until 2007, followed by development seven to 10 years later, Interior Secretary Gale Norton said."We won't see this oil for 10 years. It will have minimal impact," argued Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., a co-sponsor of the amendment that would have stripped the arctic refuge provision from the budget document. It is "foolish to say oil development and a wildlife refuge can coexist," she said.Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., argued that more oil would be saved if Congress enacted an energy policy focusing on conservation, more efficient cars and trucks and increased reliance on renewable fuels and expanded oil development in the deep-water Gulf where there are significant reserves."The fact is (drilling in ANWR) is going to be destructive," said Kerry.But drilling proponents argued that modern drilling technology can safeguard the refuge and still tap the likely - though not yet certain - 10.4 billion barrels of crude in the refuge.The vote Wednesday contrasted with the last time the Senate took up the ANWR drilling issue two years ago. Then, an attempt to include it in the budget was defeated. But drilling supporters gained strength last November when Republicans picked up three additional seats, all senators who favored drilling in the refuge.Opponents of drilling complained that Republicans this time were trying "an end run" by attaching the refuge provisions to the budget, a tactic that would allow the measure to pass with a majority vote.The 19-million-acre refuge was set aside for protection by President Eisenhower in 1960, but Congress in 1980 said its 1.5 million acre coastal plain could be opened to oil development if Congress specifically authorizes it.The House has repeatedly passed measures over the years to allow drilling in ANWR only to see the legislation stalled in the Senate. But last week, the House refused to include an ANWR provision in its budget document, although any differences between the Senate and House versions would likely be resolved in negotiations.Drilling supporters argued that access to the refuge's oil was a matter of national security and that modern drilling technology would protect the region's wildlife.Environmentalists contended that while new technologies have reduced the drilling footprint, ANWR's coastal plain still would contain a spider web of pipelines that would disrupt calving caribou and disturb polar bears, musk oxen and the annual influx of millions of migratory birds.
Tuesday, March 15, 2005
sunny but cool.
The sun is OUT today in this little part of ohio. It looks like spring but it still feels like March. I am getting pumped up about a garden. I wanna get some things started soon. I think I am putting in a Squarefoot garden this year. I have done some reading about raised bed gardening and this seems to be the best approach. Looking forward to spending sometime with the kids in the garden. It is so much fun.
Friday, March 11, 2005
The thing about pretzels.
Every few weeks I go to the local grocery and buy a bunch of prepackaged lunches that I eat over the course of a week or two. Yesterday morning was such an occasion. This time I had been craving some pretzels. You know, the little bite size ones that are more of a pretzel lump than anything else. So, in addition to my usual haul,I bought a bag of them that was appropriately named "the pounder" and then went to work. I ate these pretzels on and off for the entire length of my shift. I am pretty much done with pretzels for now. I figure that the bag could now be renamed " the less than half a pounder". So, the thing about pretzels and so many other things, (especially in the realm of snack foods) is this: Does one really need anything that is named "the pounder"? I guess the answer to this particular quandry is this. Good thing pretzels take a long time to go bad. Of course, I will probably keep eating them anyway.
http://www.snydersofhanover.com/
http://www.snydersofhanover.com/
Thursday, March 10, 2005
Tuesday, March 08, 2005
Now that's a hat!
Work is going pretty well. School is past the halfway point. I cannot wait until spring. The baby is just aroung the corner and we just bought a stroller that can carry the two youngest around at the sametime. I just got a raise so the job is better than it was before.
Life is still going on here in Dayton.
Life is still going on here in Dayton.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)