Town Square

Post a New Topic

Letter: 'Hockey grandmother' decries campaign's 'attack dog' mentality

Original post made on Sep 9, 2008

As a proud hockey grandmother, I am furious with the GOP vice presidential nominee's use of the label "hockey mom."

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, September 10, 2008, 12:00 AM

Comments (40)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream American
a resident of another community
on Sep 9, 2008 at 2:52 pm

Feminists hate Sarah 'cause she's not shrill, nor ugly. Watching them freak out and prove my point for the next 2-1/2 months is gonna be fun.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Diana
a resident of Menlo Park: University Heights
on Sep 9, 2008 at 3:37 pm

I hear voters also may be deciding whether or not to recall Gov. Schwarzenegger soon. If so, could be a lot of fun watching all those whiny Terminator wannabes go after poor Arnold because he's neither wimpy nor girly-girly. Of course nobody -- not a single citizen among us here in Mainstream America -- will be examining Palin's and Schwarzenegger's competence, judgment and integrity when deciding how to mark our ballots.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Nancy
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Sep 9, 2008 at 5:33 pm

I can't say that I'm encouraging my daughter to have five children and work full time. I wonder if the Palin children and Levi are really enjoying being front and center for the Republican party.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jim
a resident of Menlo Park: The Willows
on Sep 9, 2008 at 5:50 pm

why isn't anyone asking that of Joe Biden? nothing like a double standard. are the Feminists now telling us that it DOES take a woman to raise children and that the media dubbed "First Dude" won't be able to hack it?

Why can't she just put them in daycare for 12 hours a day like all the other working moms?

Ohhhh...she's conservative and not off the far left deep end like Hillary and her ilk would have you believe most of the nation is.

....and Arnold? please...California may as well have left Davis in office for crying out loud? If thats what the Republicans have to offer in the left coast than we deserve what we get.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Libby
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Sep 10, 2008 at 3:32 pm

If I may speak for Feminists, I'd say that our problem with Sarah Palin is that she would take away women's rights to privacy, to reproductive health care and education, and that she's running with a guy who opposed equal pay for equal work.

Assuming women will vote for a candidate just because she's female, regardles of her record, her position on key issues or her ethics is like assuming men will vote for a candidate just because he's male.

Very few of the issues and ideals that feminists hold dear are supported by Sarah Palin, regardless of what she looks like or her tone of voice.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by BlessyouLibby
a resident of another community
on Sep 10, 2008 at 7:08 pm

The cold hard facts....thank you, Libby!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream America
a resident of another community
on Sep 11, 2008 at 8:34 am

Thankfully the "feminists" are a dying breed, a result of their own outdated ideals induced by 60's drug culture and a disrespect for everyone elses rights, especially children.

Fortunately for the rest of us Sarah Palin is a breath of fresh air and represents women who work hard, love their families, and respect other people.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Joan
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Sep 11, 2008 at 10:40 am

Because we have no way of really knowing what goes on in a person's private life, I have no way of assessing Mainstream's assertion that Palin loves her family. If I had to guess, I'd guess yes. But really, how can we know?

But we can look at her public record to know that, yes, she works hard -- works hard to bring home the pork, fire those who don't agree with her, and falsely promote herself as someone who is qualified to be vice president. And respect for other people? I haven't seen evidence of that, but I have to agree with the letter-writer (Hockey Grandmother) that Palin has taken on the role of attack dog, and gleefully so. How respectful is that?

Oh, and by the way, Mainstream, I have no intention of accommodating the knuckle-draggers among us by dying off any time soon, nor do any of my fellow feminist sisters, daughters, nieces, friends and colleagues. Sorry.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 11, 2008 at 1:34 pm

You personally may not be dying off. But your ideals are. The time for hippies have passed, and their misguided, self-centered lifestyles are no longer cool. The single, angry, shrill, sterile, childless leftover beasts called feminists will slowly dwindle not to be replaced. Its mathmatical, then we can get on with it.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by deal with it
a resident of Menlo Park: Linfield Oaks
on Sep 11, 2008 at 3:14 pm

Feminism is about ensuring human rights for both sexes. How is that self-centered? Unfortunately for some of you optimists, most of us (including me) have reproduced. Guess what? My daughters are more passioante feminists than I am!

As Joan said, we're not going anywhere, and we're certainly not getting pushed out of our law practices, medical offices, and corner suites.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Joan
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Sep 11, 2008 at 3:25 pm

Seems to me that Mainstream needs to get out more into the mainstream of life and society, where she/he will quickly be disabused of the laughable notion that feminists are "sterile" and childless -- if that's what she/he really believes (do I smell a troll?).

Oh, and by the way, Mainstream, the time for hippie-bashing has passed. It's SOOOOO '90s.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by worried
a resident of Menlo Park: University Heights
on Sep 11, 2008 at 3:58 pm

Sarah Palin does not represent mainstream America. She believes abortions should be outlawed even in cases of rape and incest. Only if the mother's life is in danger would she agree that an abortion should be allowed. Most Americans do not have such extreme views on this issue.

Also, nobody has the guts to ask her the question I want to know, but her stated viewpoint on abortion implies this: would she force other women who find out through amniocentisis or other methods that the child they were hoping to have will be born with downs syndrome to make the same decision she did? Although I know she had a right to make this choice, and is being applauded her bravery in making it, the baby Trig is the one who will have the most difficulty in his life and will have to be the brave one. He did not have a choice, but at least he has a family that believes they can cope with his needs and welcome him. Some people will not be able to cope with such a situation, I think women should have a choice in these cases as they now do. I would not want to have been born into this world both severly challenged and unwanted. I also worry about the fate of an unwanted child born of rape or incest. Society does not take the greatest care of children like these.

Also, I worry about teenage girls who get pregnant because they know nothing about birth control. Or they get HIV or other sexually transmitted diseases because they know nothing about that, sex education saves lives in many ways. Ms. Palin knows abstinance only education for teens does not work, her own teenage daughter is currently unwed and pregnant, yet she is against providing adolescents with information that can save their lives.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Another Sarah
a resident of another community
on Sep 11, 2008 at 4:20 pm

Thankfully, Mainstream is not Menlo Park, nor most of urban Kalifornia. Abortion is an abomination against humanity. Except in the case of rape or incest, the woman CHOSE to have sex. There was her choice to have risky sex. To kill an innocent child is not a womans choice. That is NOT her body to choose with. In the case of rape or incest the child involved had no choice in the matter and is a victim of circumstance, why does that deserve a death sentence? I suppose if my spouse is raped than he/she deserves to die because maybe I couldn't stand to be with a dirty rape vicim.

This is not even a religious view. From a purely scientific point of view it can be seen that life begins at conception. Look at the technology that we have today and it can be demonstrated that the change is instantaneous.

Feminist control of this issue is purely selfish and a power play only. Sarah Palin was absolutely correct in keeping her child. There are plenty of conditions that an amnio can diagnose and things that can be prepared for if known early. Including Downs. Ask the Downs children of this world if they think that life isn't worth living. Purely selfish. NO CHILD IS UNWANTED, and they ALL deserve a chance. Who are you, feminist, to decide who gets that chance?

Hillary failed because she is emasculating and vile, and her support for Bill the Grand Pubah of selfish is revolting. Obama will fail because he has even less experience than Mrs. Palin and his socialism will not work in the US, just as it has not in the rest of the world.

Finally, It is the parent's duty of the teenage girls that you worry about to teach birth control. Not the state's. See the Obama statement in the previous paragraph, socialism and nanny states don't work. Look how well New Orleans did when the people needed the Gov't to save them. People need to take some responsibility for themselves and do something, including TEACHING THEIR OWN CHILDREN.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Libby
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Sep 11, 2008 at 4:56 pm

The same old tired sexist rants are alive and well, I see.

I feel sorry for men who have such a fragile sense of their own masculinity that any woman who seeks public office, has opinions or, heaven forfend, fails to reproduce is an emasculating threat.

Go back to watching Mad Men and let the rest of us who live in the 21st century get on with our lives. We've got children to raise, jobs to do and families to worry about.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 11, 2008 at 5:09 pm

In otherwords...Libby's got nothing.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Joan
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Sep 11, 2008 at 5:34 pm

Mainstream, Yours is a very puzzling response. Can you explain why you say Libby's got nothing? The sense I get is that she has a full life raising kids and focusing on work and family. This is nothing? Please enlighten us.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 11, 2008 at 5:59 pm

She may have a fantastic and full life, but it is a non-response to the previous post. Fire a couple of insults and give up on the logic, just like an Obama or a Hillary, or most of the other Democrats. Apparently "Another Sarah" is correct. Libby can now go off to her family and continue to live her lies. She has nothing. No argument. Just irrational, outdated beliefs, now, go back to the top of all of these comments and start over.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Annelise Connell
a resident of Portola Valley: Woodside Highlands
on Sep 12, 2008 at 9:15 am

Sarah Palin isn't shrill ? I thought it was Hillary on TV before I noticed the bad hairdo. How could I vote for someone with so little hair sense. I wonder if it's dyed? Palin's rather frumpy and schoolmarmish next to Cindy McCain, but then Cindy can really be over the top. Now, that Todd Palin's a hunk. As to Palin not being ugly, I'll grant that, but her jaw is a little too square for real beauty, don't you think?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sheila
a resident of another community
on Sep 12, 2008 at 9:21 am

I am very troubled by all of the comments. I think that each side has valid concerns. I am a mother of 3 young children. I went to college, have been an executive in the corporate world, and now work from home so that I can have a career and a family. I strongly urge everyone to refrain from generalizing. I cannot speak for all women, and neither can you. Libby (aka "deal with it"), I respect your opinion and am glad that we live in a country that gives you that freedom. You are right when you say that abortion is a "human rights" issue. Human rights should be afforded to all of us, regardless of our state of development or our disability. There is clear and compelling evidence that human life begins at the fertilization of the egg. I don't deny that women have been controlled by men in the past. However, it is time to move past that and be strong enough to protect the life that is capable of growing within us. A miracle that is only afforded to women. It is a powerful thing. If raising a child is not what a woman wants, adoption is available. Sometimes things don't always go the way we want, but we need to always consider others - and that ALWAYS and ESPECIALLY includes human lives that are vulnerable - such as those in the womb and the ill or disabled. Nine months of being uncomfortable is a small price to pay for honoring the life of another human being.
I apologize to everyone who wanted to read comments about "hockey grandmother." The issue seems to have devolved.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by not a fan
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Sep 12, 2008 at 9:52 am

A couple of things.

Whether you like it or not, abortion has always been a part of our culture. The fact that individuals find it repugnant does not erase the fact (FACT!) that prior to legalized abortion, women were having abortions and dying or suffering permanent damage. No matter what YOU may want for yourself, you have no control over the choices that others will make. Given that we aren't going to eliminate abortion -- any more than prohibition eliminated alcohol -- can any rational person be that opposed to allowing a woman a safe abortion vs a life-threatening abortion?

Next: if Sarah Palin were a man, she would be a disastrous choice as a VP. But because she's a flamboyant woman, she's gotten a lot of support. Now, that is sexism.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Sheila
a resident of another community
on Sep 12, 2008 at 10:11 am

Abortion is not an issue of what is "repugnant" to someone. There are some issues that need to be addressed that are extremely serious in nature. One side is saying that it is "murder" the other side is saying it is "choice." The issue clearly needs to be examined if there is such a huge discrepency in views. The premise that an act is OK if it is status quo is irresponsible. In order to live in a civilized society, there are rules that should be followed in order to live peaceably and to act with the good will of all in mind. People have been lying, cheating, stealing, and clubbing people over the head to get what they want since the dawn of time also. It doesn't mean that we make it right because it is what people have always done. As a culture evolves, as our knowledge of the world increases, we must examine how we live and adjust accordingly. Perhaps, if we start looking at the tiny beginnings of a human being as being a life worth loving and protecting, then maybe we won't be so cavalier about killing them when they are adults or hurting them when they are children. It may even increase the respect that people have for women.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Paulie
a resident of Menlo Park: Belle Haven
on Sep 12, 2008 at 10:39 am

I want to make the Beast With Two Backs with Sarah Palin.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by not a fan
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Sep 12, 2008 at 10:41 am

I don't think you quite get it, Sheila. Laws work only when they reflect social norms, and that's been proven over and over again. If the majority of people approved of stealing and violence, any laws against those acts would be ineffective. It's only because criminals are fringe members of society that punitive laws carry some weight. No matter how much you decry abortion, no matter how many people abhor it, it has occurred since time immemorial and will continue, whether legal or not, as long as the majority tacitly accept it as a necessary evil.

Instead of a purely emotional response, let's think this through for a moment. There are many scary consequences involved with clamping down on abortion and insisting that life begins at conception. For example, we have the problem that a substantial number of pregnancies -- I believe about 15% -- end in miscarriage. I can well envision a society in which grieving mothers are investigated on suspicion of murder. Is that what we want?

As biotechnology continues to evolve, those "tiny beginnings" will be easier to eradicate, whether you or I like it or not. In 100 years, I expect most people will laugh at our primitive concerns. That said, a person's personal stance on abortion should not have any bearing on that person's suitability for office. But I would not support any candidate for any position who wanted to impose his/her own personal beliefs on the public.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Anna
a resident of Menlo Park: University Heights
on Sep 12, 2008 at 10:41 am

"Perhaps, if we start looking at the tiny beginnings of a human being as being a life worth loving and protecting, then maybe we won't be so cavalier about killing them when they are adults..."

Sheila, please apply the thinking skills I'm sure you're capable of using. The most obvious example of the silliness of your comment is the anti-abortionist in the White House, who wages unprovoked war -- killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people -- and unwaveringly supports the death penalty. The examples of others like him are countless.

Regardless of her view on abortion, Sarah Palin IS a disastrous choice for VP -- a know-nothing and religious fanatic who has spun out of control with the power and authority of leadership, probably thinking that her rise to power was god's will. With McCain's age and health issues, this woman could soon be president if voters support this ticket. Do we really want GW Bush in heels for another four years? Can we survive such a disaster for another four years?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by sheila
a resident of another community
on Sep 12, 2008 at 11:03 am

Sigh.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 12, 2008 at 11:34 am

"Anna" your replies are all speculation and insults on the republican party, and the typical tools of the liberal elite left. No substance.

"Fan" your response is also speculative. its the equivalent of "just becasue people do things we should let them". There should be no moral standard, eh? go back to the top and the paragraphs on the selfish 60 hippies above.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Anna
a resident of Menlo Park: University Heights
on Sep 12, 2008 at 12:17 pm

Mainstream, I've been hoping to see some substance from you. Instead, we get only spew. "Liberal elite left" -- give me a break. Stop getting your talking points and cheap insults from the right-wing propaganda machine and provide some meat to chew on. Not only is your "selfish 60 hippies" comment straight from the right-wing playbook, you resort to regurgitation rather than addressing others' comments with honest, reasoned argument. Stop being so intellectually lazy and engage in a real discussion.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 12, 2008 at 12:41 pm

Anna, Ive provided plenty of substance above, several times. "Another Sarah" also posted an stack of logic that has gone unanswered by you or anyone else. Hence, my comments "go back to the beginning" and try again. the only liberal response to logic is hate and insults, you have proven my point.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Anna
a resident of Menlo Park: University Heights
on Sep 12, 2008 at 1:01 pm

"Hillary failed because she is emasculating and vile, and her support for Bill the Grand Pubah of selfish is revolting." -- "another sarah"

"Feminists hate Sarah 'cause she's not shrill, nor ugly." -- Mainstream

"The single, angry, shrill, sterile, childless leftover beasts called feminists will slowly dwindle not to be replaced." -- Mainstream

Substance and logic, eh?

"the only liberal response to logic is hate and insults, you have proven my point." -- Mainstream

Change that to "right-wing response," Mainstream, then look in the mirror. Maybe we define substance and logic differently, and should agree to disagree, because this discussion is pointless.




 +   Like this comment
Posted by not a fan
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Sep 12, 2008 at 1:19 pm

>>>"Fan" your response is also speculative. its the equivalent of "just becasue people do things we should let them".<<<

Ever heard of "government by the people, for the people?" We live in a democratic society, and our government serves us, not vice versa. Some of you seem to prefer totalitarian leadership, as long as promulgates your beliefs. I guess some of you think that Sarah Palin will be able to exercise hegemony on your behalf, but by the time you realize that you were wrong, it may be too late.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 12, 2008 at 3:26 pm

"You personally may not be dying off. But your ideals are. The time for hippies have passed, and their misguided, self-centered lifestyles are no longer cool. The single, angry, shrill, sterile, childless leftover beasts called feminists will slowly dwindle not to be replaced. Its mathmatical, then we can get on with it." - Logical arguments with namecalling for flair...unanswered


"There was her choice to have risky sex. To kill an innocent child is not a womans choice. That is NOT her body to choose with. In the case of rape or incest the child involved had no choice in the matter and is a victim of circumstance, why does that deserve a death sentence? I suppose if my spouse is raped than he/she deserves to die because maybe I couldn't stand to be with a dirty rape vicim." - Logical argument...unanswered

"This is not even a religious view. From a purely scientific point of view it can be seen that life begins at conception. Look at the technology that we have today and it can be demonstrated that the change is instantaneous." - Logical agrument unanswered

"NO CHILD IS UNWANTED, and they ALL deserve a chance. Who are you, feminist, to decide who gets that chance?" - Logical agrument unanswered

"A miracle that is only afforded to women. It is a powerful thing. If raising a child is not what a woman wants, adoption is available. Sometimes things don't always go the way we want, but we need to always consider others - and that ALWAYS and ESPECIALLY includes human lives that are vulnerable - such as those in the womb and the ill or disabled. Nine months of being uncomfortable is a small price to pay for honoring the life of another human being." - Logical argument unanswered

"Perhaps, if we start looking at the tiny beginnings of a human being as being a life worth loving and protecting, then maybe we won't be so cavalier about killing them when they are adults or hurting them when they are children." - logical argument unanswered



I WIN.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by joke is on you
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Sep 12, 2008 at 4:02 pm

All your comments were addressed, Mainstream. Not only do you lack logic, you're apparently illiterate.

Have fun with whatever you "won." Nasty Dumb Person of 2008, maybe? Or are we saving that title for your idol?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 12, 2008 at 4:03 pm

Where? Show me? Im slow...but also.

I WIN.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Libby
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Sep 15, 2008 at 11:20 am

Don't feed the troll


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 15, 2008 at 12:14 pm

I STILL WIN.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Harriet
a resident of another community
on Sep 16, 2008 at 11:42 am

Henry (which, by the way, is your real name, not "Mainstream"),
Time to quit posting things that make plenty of sense, but only serve to infuriate and frustrate others. You have work to do. It is almost time for the curmudgeon report. (Did you think I wouldn't find out about what you have been doing with your time? You will not be having any of my famous blueberry turnovers.)


 +   Like this comment
Posted by worried
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Sep 22, 2008 at 10:22 pm

Mainstream,

I hate to spoil your post that you are so happy about, however, since you insist on bringing it up again and again:

Abortion is not murder, whether the woman became pregnant by consentual sex or was raped. -- your illogical argument answered

Life of a sort may begin at conception, but that does not mean a person instantly exists. Life is all around us in many forms, and we all destroy life (be it bugs, animals for food, or simply plants) everyday. A mass of cells in a womb is not the same as an infant child. --- illogical argument answered

No, not all children are wanted. If all children were wanted there would be no need of a discussion about abortion, because nobody would want an abortion. I do not want to decide if a woman should or should not have a baby, this is the woman's choice. That's why they call my position pro-choice. -- illogical argument answered


Just because adoption is available, that does not guarantee that the baby will be taken care of. You never know what will happen, will the right parents come along. I think this worries many women who choose to have an abortion as much as the inconvenience of a pregnancy. Pregnancy should not be used as some weapon of power, with the life produced as some sort of pawn to inspire awe. You should honour the life of the woman who realizes her limitations when she makes her choices. --- illogical argument answered

Murder and voilence have been around long before abortions were legal. In fact, statistical studies show that the murder and violent crime rates in the United States have dropped since abortion was legalized. Similar studies in countries where abortion was criminalized for a time show a surge in voilence. Perhaps a society where there are fewer unwanted children teaches people to be more loving and respectful of life. --- your illogical argument answered

you lose.



 +   Like this comment
Posted by mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 23, 2008 at 10:44 am

>>Abortion is not murder, whether the woman became pregnant by consentual sex or was raped.<<

Just because you say it is not, doesn't make it fact. your still killing someone.

>>Life of a sort may begin at conception, but that does not mean a person instantly exists. <<

I didn't realize you had the same visibility into this as God, additionally, via your reasoning on other related posts in the almanac (Web Link), it has the potential to become an adult. If you are going to use the "potential" reasoning there, than you can follow this logic to kill adults based on their "lack of potential" reference the link for the entire context.

>>No, not all children are wanted. If all children were wanted there would be no need of a discussion about abortion, because nobody would want an abortion. I do not want to decide if a woman should or should not have a baby, this is the woman's choice.<<

Did you ask all of the parents waiting to adopt? and the argument on the womans "choice" was lost earlier..remember the part on how she chose to have sex?

>>Just because adoption is available, that does not guarantee that the baby will be taken care of. You never know what will happen, will the right parents come along.<<

you are correct, but who are you to justify killing the child because you're not sure? even unwanted pregnancies go on to be children who can do great things, who are we to rob them of this chance?

>>Murder and voilence have been around long before abortions were legal. In fact, statistical studies show that the murder and violent crime rates in the United States have dropped since abortion was legalized. <<

there is a couch in the room that I am sitting...also, there are no tigers....couches keep away tigers.

I WIN.



 +   Like this comment
Posted by Joan
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Sep 23, 2008 at 11:55 am

"I didn't realize you had the same visibility into this as God..."

So, mainstream, would you mind telling us how exactly you acquired the knowledge of how God sees this?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by mainstream
a resident of another community
on Sep 23, 2008 at 1:07 pm

I DON'T have this visibility, but IM not the one advocating killing as a "choice" either.

Via previous posts, we've already established that it is a living being and thus has the potential of reaching adulthood. So worried's point is moot.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Flirtation
By Chandrama Anderson | 3 comments | 1,524 views

King of the Slides
By Cheryl Bac | 2 comments | 1,172 views

Standardized Test Prep: When to Start and Whom to Hire?
By John Raftrey and Lori McCormick | 0 comments | 448 views

Where the Sidewalk Ends
By Paul Bendix | 1 comment | 348 views