Long Time No Squeak

For a variety of reasons I have not been able to blog recently. However, I spotted this article today and thought I really should share it. It is almost porn for parents. Now I have your attention!

It is about the rules pediatricians break with their own children. Pediatricians Confessions. Of course we all suspected that our pediatricians didn't follow the book. But it is still interesting to read what rules went out the window. Of course it is really nice when pediatricians have had experience with some of the same problems we mere mortals have. They can give better advice and be less judgmental.

Of course my present pediatrician has no children and I really do think he is brilliant. So having children is not a prerequisite to being a sensible and good pediatrician.

I have to say I think my favorite story is the one at the end of the article. The mother and doctor in question only realized that maybe her 4 yr old son didn't need a sippy cup any longer when he brought her the gallon of milk, the cup, lid and valve and asked her to fill it.

I guess they all are just human, may be educated and human but still human.

Four year old kindergarten

Yup, you read that right. Four-year-old kindergarten. It's here, and I'm afraid it's here to stay.

Kindergarten, I grew up with the half-day kindergarten. Boy, have the times changed. I had morning kindergarten when I was 5 years old. I went in the morning, we did story time on the rug, letters and numbers at tables, a little free play time in the space in the room for free play and even had some recess. I remember I liked it. I met my best friend for all of elementary school there. I think I must have learned plenty, because I did fine in school.

When we moved to our state, we found our new district had all day kindergarten. I hadn't encountered that before. I was very leary of it. I couldn't understand why kindergarteners should need a full day. My oldest didn't have issues with it, he did fine with the lunches and all that. I was shocked that they had kindergarteners writing full sentences and stories. And I thought, "Great, is this what No Child Left Behind is bringing us?" I'm still not sold on the full day of kindergarten. My youngest is getting better at the hot lunches and dealing with it better, but I keep wondering if she had only had half day kindergarten and got into that routine, would she have done better with the lunch situation next year? She was in preschool two mornings a week for two years, so the routine of school was handled pretty well, with story time, songs and games.

So, not yet sold on the full day of kindergarten requirement, our district just started four year old kindergarten. They don't have room in their buildings, so they created a partnership with the area preschools to hold all the four year olds for this program. It is offered free to all four year olds in our district boundaries. I've been at PTO meetings last year at our elementary school, and they've talked about it then. One of the arguments is that it will get kids ready for kindergarten.

Ok, stop, hold it there, isn't kindergarten supposed to be the year that kids are helped to get ready for the rest of elementary school? Isn't kindergarten the year when those teachers take all those kids and help sort them into a more even playing field with social skill work, playing with others work, and learning to be a student work? Hmmm...but, on thinking about it, wasn't my kindergarteners already pushed to write full sentences (before you freak, they don't have to be perfect in spelling and punctuation, but still)? I am concerned, because, after reading parenting books and websites, I've seen it again and again, that young children learn through PLAY. So, why is the school routine being pushed so early? It seems like play time is being diminished.

So then, at these last year PTO meetings, the school district line is that not all kids have access to preschool or have parents that have all the skills to teach their children to function in our school society. Ok, fair enough, then let's call a spade, a spade and say that we are doing this because we need to bring those on the lower socio-economic rungs up to a more level playing field. And to make it fair, they will offer it to all students. But instead of telling me this is good for everyone, could you please be honest and say that it's for those people who don't have my background? And then, this begs a bigger question, besides making the school districts carry the burden of trying help students achieve more than their socio-economic status would normally allow, why isn't the whole of society working harder to solve the problems of the poor and disadvantaged? Yeah, don't get me started.

Then, at this month's PTO meeting, the principal mentioned that the school district, because it is getting state funding for the four year old kindergarten, will be operating with a surplus. Something like a $700,000 surplus.

Ok, now that's a good thing. Though, where did this surplus come from? Are we getting more money from the state than we are spending on 4K? And how could that be ok with the state? I don't know all those details, and I keep thinking that maybe I should be attending school board meetings. Perhaps getting the local paper (have I mentioned that I'm cheap) to understand this more. But, I won't knock the surplus, because that means my school district has some back up funds in these economic times. But, again, then, let's call a spade, a spade. We do 4K because it is good economic sense, but maybe it might not be the best for our 4 year old kids. Though, I think it will be more of a win-win situation. I just wish that they wouldn't sit there and pretend it is all about the kids, because it's not. That has been the impression I have gotten from the main arguments.

I'm still not sold on more school structure for our younger students. But I don't think it is a horrible thing. I'm sort of down the middle, because I will concede that the school district having more money at its disposal without raising local taxes. Though, it is taxpayer money one way or another and we pay one way or another. So, while I am glad that my tax money is going to help people who might be at a disadvantage economically and couldn't send their kid to preschool like we did, I wish our local governments would be more honest about the fact that we pay one way or another through various taxes for these programs. And if we didn't help these students to succeed, we might be paying for them with tax money to hold them in prisons or through welfare.

It is all very tricky and I don't have any answers. But, questions are a good start.

Wine palette

I am not a wine snob. Never have been. I don't know much about them, though I keep trying to find out more. The best I can say is that I do like wine, but I like it cheap.

Sadly, probably my first experience with wine was Boone's Farm Strawberry Hill in college. College students don't have a lot of money, and, as everyone knows, their use of drinking is not focused on the purely social or the palette pleasing characteristics.

I also lived in England for a bit, and, besides tea, I got a chance to sample wines with dinner. I still didn't know a whole lot and would drink whatever was set on the table. I think I learned I don't like dry whites that well.

I have probably been drinking wine with the intention of having it enhance a meal for about 11 or 12 years now. During our honeymoon, we had a Spanish cider that was fantastic and Mr. Wild and I, both novices to the wine industry, were interested in finding our wine palettes.

When Mr. Wild and I were in grad school, I think we started to try to appreciate wine for its intended craftsmanship. Unfortunately, we still were looking for cheap. This was in the days before $2 buck Chuck, but there were alternatives, and we also didn't drink wine as often as we do now. Wine with Kraft mac and cheese just doesn't quite work either. (Though I think I have some friends who could pair mac and cheese with something)

When we moved to the Chicago area, we did make an attempt at broadening our palettes. At the very least, we have discovered that we both like German makes of wine. I find it a bit amusing because Mr. Wild has some German in his family tree. I think our favorite is a spaetlese or a spaetlese riesling.

We thought we were being big wig wine lovers when we had a wine tasting in our home. They were good wines and it really did expose us to a lot of different ones. We found we liked a German Dornfelder, the only red my husband has ever liked. But we cannot remember the winery who made it, and have not found another bottled Dornfelder that we liked. Another really good one was a Gewurztraminer. It was spicy and goes well with spicy Indian food we enjoy eating. The wines ordered from the wine tasting were a bit on the pricey side, and we never ordered again. This was the point where we both knew that he liked German wines, almost exclusively.

We had friends in the area that I would say have a much more sophisticated palette than us. They are slightly older, so I would say maybe more practiced. At their house I got to appreciate their reds--shiraz and merlot--and we tried more Australian wines as well. I've come to like the blends by Rosemount Estates. We liked the traminer reisling that was made by this company, the first time we tried it was in visiting England, but soon found it was also imported to the States. I liked some of the red blends.

We do actually like Australian wines as well, mostly because we can get them cheap. My most recent favorite is Alice White's Lexia. I seriously picked it out because of the Alice. But come to find the wine is made of the Muscat grape, which was also what made up the only sparkling wine we've really liked, Muscato D'Asti. As my husband says, the Coca Cola generation has had our palette ruined and we prefer sweet wines.

My palette might be a bit wider. I am willing to try reds, especially if my friends are drinking them. I suddenly found I liked cabernet sauvignons during my Jane Austen night. But, I won't buy any for myself, because I know Mr. Wild won't drink it with me.

I think what I've learned about wines is that I drink what I like and to keep trying new things. Red wine with dark chocolate can be tasty. So, I am still looking, but I could never do wine reviews. All the looking up of these links for today's post though has taught me more about the wines we do like, and I can kind of see why. Still, I prefer wines that are under $10 and I don't care to spend any more than that, even if there's something that is so incredibly fantastic.

Unless maybe for a special occasion.

Where's my voice?

Been a long time since I've blogged, but I haven't been able to find something interesting to write about, so I am writing about not writing.

I have ideas at the back of my head. I'm kicking myself for missing two Mondays of Monday night memories. But I just can't get myself to sit and write. Things are busy at home and work.

I had a good week last week, but busy, busy, it seemed. My husband made some awesome potato leek soup.

I went shopping Tuesday night, I think.

Wednesday Mr. Wild had his D&D night, so I spent it with the kids, but after they were in bed, I got all crazy and made a PowerPoint on clothing during the Jane Austen era.

Thursday was Cub Scouts, parent-teacher conferences, and my Jane Austen night with the ladies. Surprised them with my pseudo-Early Republic outfit with a hair do and in the rain no-less. And dazzled with my formal presentation on gorgeous Early Republic/Empire/Regncy dresses.

Friday was Mr. Wild's birthday dinner (I got stuffed on enchiladas with mole sauce) and a very lackluster James Bond movie. It was sad not having the theme music cue up EVER in the movie. It was not my James Bond. Give me Pierce Brosnan back!

Saturday, I realized I hadn't had a breather to sit and talk with my kids. We talked about their parent teacher conferences and what was going well (and maybe not so well). A friend I made at my work, who left only a year after we both started, came over for dinner one last time before she moves to Chicago. It was fun to talk Facebook, her new beau, her new upcoming job, and the election. And excellent dinner fixings--chicken in the crock pot with Italian dressing, green bean casserole (you know the one, is there any other?), squash casserole, crusty bread and carrot cake for dessert. And Lexia, a white wine by Alice White.

Sunday, I made the kids the awesome pumpkin waffles found earlier on this blog. They are a hit and are going to be a featured hit with my soon to be nine year old's birthday sleep over. Oh, no, we're stepping into the land of sleepovers. Yikes. I also spent Sunday finding my voice elsewhere.

So, I guess I've been busy. That and more stupid television watching than I care to admit. I need another good book, but Mr. Wild didn't bring me back the last installment of the Twilight series. I've read spoilers, so I know what to expect, but we won't go back to who we really think Bella should be with. I do have Mansfield Park on my night stand, I need to get back to the classics.

Ah, but now off to do some work I put off way too long.

And now for something completely different

I enjoy Cake Wrecks (see our side list for that blog) and it led me to this new to me blog:

Fail Blog

I am laughing so much, I am almost crying. Hope it brightens your day too.

Totally misread

I guess I wasn't clear in my last blog. I don't feel that Edward and Bella would truly last, because I don't feel that deeper connection that she seems to have with Jacob. To me, the connection is deeper when you can laugh at yourselves and each other, have a great time, relax, be yourself and, at the same time, be electrified by each other.

Bella, to me, is so much more relaxed and herself with Jacob. Besides, I still can't stand it how much control Edward has over her life. Couched in the fact that he's trying to protect her, but I've heard about relationships like that and they can be bad. Maybe I'm too modern, I don't feel I need a man to protect me and that's what I don't like about the story.

So, I still don't believe Edward is the right one, because, I believe the connection to Jacob is stronger. Yes, he's less "dangerous," and, maybe on the surface, the "safe" choice, but personally, I cannot see anything that tells me she is connected to Edward in a deeper way. Maybe the author just did a better job of describing the relationship between Bella and Jacob. I think a relationship born of friendship or developing into a strong friendship is stronger, deeper, and, if she had let Jacob actually into her life as a suitor, more passionate. But she's never going to know, is she?

That's just how I see it, so I find it to be tragic.

So, nyah. I'm still all for Team Jacob. Stinking bloodsuckers.

Defending Passion

Oh girl come on, passion not lasting? And I can not let you describe motherhood that way, or being over thirty that way. I find it hard to believe you really think that. I get that you like Jacob better but the safe choice is not always the right choice, it can also be the boring choice. Lack of passion can result in lack of interest. And no offense to all you parents but my personal experience is that parents do not know what life partner will most make their child happy. They may like a safe option but safety does not always equal marital felicity. I know from your feelings on Jane Austen you are no Charlotte Lucas.

Now Bella does love Jacob but she is just in love with Edward more. Way more. There is some passion with Jacob too but Edward sings to her heart in a way no one else can. They ultimately complete each other. Both are lost without the other. She may say she doesn't like flashy things but if she didn't like them a little she would not have been attracted to Edward in the first place. Like all interesting characters she is a self contradiction. Also Bella and Edward have mutual taste in music and art and literature that will sustain them if they ever get tired of making out.

And lets face it passion is everything-from the thirty something mother of three. Passion built the Taj Mahal, wrote the most gripping and most disturbing stories, destroyed lives and saved others. Passion is what makes your heart stop with a glance. Passion is what carries you through premarital hell and post children exhaustion (oh and D&D obsessions). Passion is what fucks people up for sure, and yes many passionate beginnings burn out but many burn bright and smolder forever.

And don't even pretend you and Mr Wild were/are not passionate. I've heard your "when you first meet" story many times and it is told with passion. You were not just friends that became lovers, the spark was there at the beginning.

No I'm all for passion, definitely makes a good read. What I am not for is being told Edward is gorgeous constantly. Once per book really is enough for me.