MOM FURIOUS AFTER DAYCARE WORKER BREASTFED HER SON

ABC11.com ^ | 2/7/17 | Andrea Blanford

[Bigg Red]

Yes, in a nutshell.

[Agamemnon]

Prove it.

We don't travel in the same circles, so I doubt that any of the examples I might cite would be meaningful to you, and no amount of similar examples to mine would ever be enough for someone like you who has their mind made up - however glaringly wrong your position is - so I won't play that game.

That said, it seems that even Ivanka Trump - as a working mother who is going to make it her personal mission to address this topic on behalf of many working mothers - knows what I know about the capacity of women to be able to work outside the home and to balance that with rearing well-adjusted offspring successfully.

I have found that those who bitterly opposed working mothers, like my wife was, did so out of a spirit of resentment and dis-satisfaction clothed with a veneer of self-righteous "piety", and they gnawed on a self-consuming bitterness driven as it was by envy.

FReegards!

[donna]

While the elites live in a bubble, this is what happens to the America stripped of traditional values by law and raised with absent parents:

[Agamemnon]

I am certainly ready to be judged, wordsmith.

I'll take that moniker as a compliment, thank you. That was the same nickname my immediate supervisor gave me at the time that I served at the US Food and Drug Administration as a Review Chemist. I left FDA to take a position as a VP for a Fortune 500 Pharmaceutical firm, and later launched my own consulting business.

I write, advise, and critique regulatory submissions and legal briefs as I advise mergers & acquisitions in the course of making assessments of manufacturing and clinical operations. I have been blessed with an ability to write, and believe me - it pays well to write well. It is very astute of you to pick up on something like that.

I am happy to stand in judgment of you even as I have invited you to stand in judgment of me.

You assume much (a little judgement [sic.] there). Sorry you’ve such a tender spot about letting others care for your children. Many do.

Don't know that it's a "tender" spot that I have so much as it is a deep and abiding appreciation for what a talented and capable mother of 4 has been able to do. I like to say that when I married my wife, I married the kind of girl that every guy wished he was married to.

I worked very hard, sacrificed personal wants, and lived smaller (think 50’s style) to have a single income family with a full time Mom.

If your choices made you and your family happy and if you can bring yourself to a place that does not harbor a spirit of resentment of others who chose differently, then you have nothing to apologize for.

As far as the '50's go (I was born back then), post war US global economic supremacy came with victory. This led to an unrivaled economic boom where most women stayed at home caring for children (to replenish 400,000 Americans lost). "The Lucille Ball Show," "Ozzie and Harriett," and "Leave it to Beaver" reflected life in an anomalous time.

During the Industrial Revolution most women not working farms worked outside the home even as they did during the wars. Even wealthy women who stayed at home often had servants and slaves to attend to children. For the well-off, the day care providers were hired hands serving in-house. Stay at home moms of that time rarely suffered the "sacrifices" of "personal wants" of which you speak.

My kids are great, and low on materialism (which I believe often drives two incomes)

While that may be true for some, you'll want to be careful not to paint two-income earners with too broad a paint brush.

FReegards!

[polymuser]

Heh heh! Full of yourself much?

[Agamemnon]

Heh heh! Full of yourself much?

Nah, probably just a little better studied on this topic than you are, that's all.

FReegards!

[Agamemnon]

While the elites live in a bubble, this is what happens to the America stripped of traditional values by law and raised with absent parents:

I have already established that neither I nor my wife's background included being born, bred, and educated among or as "elites," and nor were my kids. Is Ivanka Trump the one with whom you have concerns pertaining to the "elites?"

Your Gallup poll is interesting, though my kids were born in 1988, 1990, 1992, and 1994 and completed their time in day care significantly before the graph's inflection point.

Be careful not to conflate those who choose to place their kids in day care (the topic of discussion) with those who are "absent " parents. That would be little more than a careless extrapolation.

By the way America's public schools and institutions certainly have gone a great distance in trying to dispossess children of their core Christian morality, but I am happy to say that my wife and I had 4 graduates of public schools who regularly shined the light of truth and openly challenged a spirit of amorality in that very dark place.

FReegards!

[donna]

You’re right.

It IS all about you.

[Agamemnon]

You’re right. It IS all about you.

No, actually it's about what are your preconceived notions and the reliance you place on what is likely bad data that you use to support them.

As Kellyann Conway might ask, what were the internals of that Gallup poll? Who was sampled? How were the questions framed? How does you data support the position you are trying to argue with me?

You may recall that Gallup gave up trying to do polling in the 2016 election, because their land-line based methods in the 2012 election are so poor, antiquated, and non-predictive. What confidence do you have that their data in the poll you reference isn't derived from the same Democrat- oversampled, daytime television-watching, stay-at-home welfare queens that they used to make failed election predictions?

I answered your sad little "prove it" challenge with Invanka Trump as an example. Having mentioned Kellyann Conway just now, you do realize that she is, like my own wife, a mother to 4 children, who is not that "stay-at-home-mom" who while she is advising the most powerful man in the world is not attending to the minute-to-minute needs of her children.

Will you also now continue to stand there in your self-important, self-righteous judgment of Kellyann Conway too?

It's a sad, bitter little corner of the world you choose to occupy.

The data you use to support your theories and opinions might not be that reliable either.

FReegards!

[donna]

I don’t understand what you mean.

[Agamemnon]

I don’t understand what you mean.

Sure, you do.

More correctly: what you don't understand well enough is statistical sampling technique to either defend or cogently expound upon Gallup's reported data, yet you rely on the data blindly to make a point that doesn't have any relevance to the current discussion.

FReegards!

[donna]

I reject your last reply. You did not put enough thought into it.

Just a cheap shot!

[Agamemnon]

...You did not put enough thought into it. ....

Projection of one's own cognitive deficits like that is not necessarily indicative of one's inability to understand.

It is more a reflection of the bitter, envious little corner of the world that you appear to inhabit and that informs silly statements like, "Why have a baby if you’re going to let strangers raise him?" and then back up such statements, while resentfully railing at imaginary "elites," utilizing questionable, unqualified statistics that simply don't apply anyway.

There is none so dull as one who refuses to understand.

Try a little harder.

FReegards!

[bar sin·is·ter]

Bingo

[donna]

You are deteriorating into mere personal attacks. That’s no way to defend your position.

How can you be sure that your babysitter never breastfed one of your kids? It could have happened.

[donna]

Poor Scooter Libby - I just read his Wikipedia entry. He paid a price. So unfair.

[Agamemnon]

You are deteriorating into mere personal attacks. That’s no way to defend your position.

Projecting again, I see.

How can you be sure that your babysitter never breastfed one of your kids? It could have happened.

Anyone can play the speculative game of "How can you be sure that your **PERSON OF INTEREST** never **BLANKED** one of your kids? It could have happened."

As a child, did your mother never once place you in the care of someone else for any amount of time? A relative? The church nursery, perhaps?

Assuming you are a mother yourself, have you never once placed your child in the care of someone else for any amount of time? A relative? The church nursery, perhaps?

Let's fill in hypothetical **BLANKS** employing your logic, shall we?

"How can you be sure that a close relative other than your own mother never breastfed you? It could have happened."

"How can you be sure that your church nursery workers never sexually pleasured themselves with you while in their care? It could have happened."

"How can you be sure that your church nursery workers never sexually pleasured themselves with your child while in their care? It could have happened."

"How can you be sure that a close relative never sexually pleasured themselves with you as an infant? It could have happened."

Go ahead - prove the negative.

FReegards!

[donna]

I’m thinking you don’t have any kids.

Thanks for the entertainment. I’ll sign off now.

[Agamemnon]

I’m thinking you don’t have any kids.

Sorry to have to conclude from your latest display of incoherence that it hit much too close to home when the possibility presented itself that your mother had in fact left you in the care of someone who may have abused you as a child.

Checkmate.

Enjoy the rest of what remains of your thanklessly resentful and hopelessly envious life.

[Rebelbase]

Update:

Carrboro police explain why no charges against daycare worker who breastfed baby

http://wncn.com/2017/02/14/carrboro-police-explain-why-no-charges-against-daycare-worker-who-breastfed-baby/