There is the concept, in a stable housing environment and economy, that your income will keep increasing. And a lot of people stay in their houses for years and years, so what you can afford when you buy it is different that what you can afford, say, 10 years later. That doesn't mean that you should be house poor for years and years, but the concept of stretching your ability to meet the payments might only be temporary. And maybe you get a better house for it. Maybe a house that is a better investment in the long run. Just some thought.

It all depends on who you are talking to and which class you are signing him up for. If someone asks what grade he is in and you want to give the quick, no confusion answer, I would say "chronologically he would be in 1st grade" If it is someone more savvy to homeschooling or is truly interested, you could expand the above to say "...... but because he gets so much individualized attention he is working at a 3rd grade level." For classes: for the gym class I would sign him up by age, not grade. For academics I would sign him up by work level.

This has circulated before, only as performance evaluations by employers. http://americatopten.blogspot.com/2006/12/funny-performance-appraisals-comments.html No teachers were harmed in the making of this list. I doubt they were even performance evaluations.

This is our first year back after homeschooling for 8 years. My oldest is in 10th and my youngest is in 8th. So far it has been a great experience. For my youngest: they bumped her up to 8th grade when she is supposed to be in 7th. After I showed them our academic records and they met her they had no problem putting her into a grade higher. All the friends she made through town sports are there so she knows a ton of kids already. My oldest basically had the red carpet rolled out for her. She had done 2 online AP classes as a freshman (she got A's in both classes and 4's on the AP exam), so when we enrolled her the school allowed her to choose whichever class she wanted regardless of grade or AP level (usually only juniors and seniors are allowed to take APs) They even said they would allow dual enrollment at a CC when she was a senior if she wanted higher level classes. She is taking a class called Mock Trial that has a courtroom/debate curriculum and they compete with other schools in the state. She is taking AP Chem and AP US History. She is in honors level for everything else. They even put her in Honors French even though she had not taken French since 7th grade. I guess her 4 years of Latin, 2 years of Italian and 1 year of Greek in addition to the French made them okay with it all. The class is taught completely in French which she loves. I love it because I could not create the same thing at home. I can not speak French. I could not find a live AP Chem lab that she could do in a group. I could not find a debate club that competed state wide. The guidance counselors have been great -- very encouraging. Both girls are looking forward to joining the Drama club, and my youngest may do Volleyball. For us it has been a positive experience. It think it all depends on the schools and the leadership there. I think it also helped that we have always done a very rigorous academic path and I kept records of everything.

Thank you all for taking the time to respond. I didn't want to be one of those people who said something along the lines of "oh, I heard Jenny McCarthy has found some type of cure for Autism" and cause people any heartache. Your responses have helped me understand the issue better. Thank you

A while back I skimmed Jenny McCarthy's book on her experience with Autism and her son. It seemed interesting. I know she has been on Oprah talking about it, etc. Recently, though, I was reading an article on autism and when the subject of her and her books were brought up the parents had a very negative response. The article didn't do a good job explaining why these parents disagreed so much with her and why they thought she was doing harm. I have no opinion on this either way - I don't know enough about it - I just didn't know there was two such opposing views on this.

Here is my theory: If someone rates a thread with one star, but doesn't post about what their issue is, then I think they see too much of themselves in the thread and it makes them uncomfortable. For whatever reason the thread makes them look at something about themselves that they don't like or don't want to face. Otherwise why wouldn't they post their complaint with the thread along with rating it poorly? A while ago I posted a rant about pain-in-the-butt kids and parents on travel sports teams. All the responses were people that agreed with what I was saying, but there were a lot of bad ratings on it. I think that in that case people recognized that they were they pain-in-the-butt parents but didn't have any defense, so instead just rated the thread poorly. Just my opinion.

This coach sounds like your typical pain-in-the-butt volunteer parent. A little too much power and BANG they are a tyrant. However, I am not sure I would have pulled my daughter from the squad. That just punishes her. My daughter had a real doosey of a softball coach. Bad sportsmanship, horrible favoritism, no morals (he was arrested for trying to solicit a woman on Craigslist and STILL was allowed to coach) Bad all the way around. We just ...... worked around him. I stayed for every single practice, the whole time. I went to every single game. Just being there meant he couldn't bench her too much or say anything too rude. I was always within earshot. We talked about what to do if he did such an such or so and so. She knew when to just say "yes coach" and then do the opposite. When she was up at bat, though, she was doing what she loved. And when she was on the field she was doing what she loved. To have her quit would have meant that she was ultimately not doing what she loved. We have worked this way for 3 years now, and though it makes for some stress I cannot imagine missing out on those 3 years of softball. Just some food for thought.

Update: My nephew just got word that he absolutely will not be allowed into the Marines. They didn't even give him a chance to submit his packet with recommendation letters and an essay explaining why he has his tattoo. I think the deciding factor was because in a v-neck tshirt you can see the top of his tattoo. In a regular neck tshirt you can't, but I believe that sometimes the uniform does include a v-neck. He is very very disappointed but is now looking into the Army. Thanks for all the input and advice. I really hoped that this would turn out differently, but things do happen for a reason, so who knows.........

Update: I called another recruiter this morning to double check what my nephew's recruiter was saying, and he basically said it all depends on who is looking at the tattoo. He did say that having a tattoo was not an immediate "no", but that it did require approval and that it could mean a "no". Hopefully my nephew will get approved. He will have no problem getting letters of recommendations from the local VFW hall and the State Police training camp he went to last summer, as well as teachers and his boss. I really really wish he never got this tattoo. This is why I don't like them. They are so **** PERMANENT! Once you have one....... that's it. I bet he is regretting it, but he did check with the recruiter before getting it last year. If he doesn't do the Marines they hopefully he will consider another branch of the military. It just a shame because he has always had his heart set on the Marines. Thanks for all the responses. My sister appreciated all the feedback!

I am really really really hoping that this recruiter just somehow has it wrong. This is the recruiter that my nephew has been talking with since last year, so he made it sound like it was a new thing happening. This was also the same recruiter who gave him the go ahead to get a tattoo. I will call my sister tomorrow and have her call and ask another recruiter. I would be great if it could be cleared up. It just seems strange that the recruiter would all of a sudden now bring this up like it is a new policy. I can guarantee, though, that it isn't something with my nephew. He graduated from h.s. in June, has been working at his job since, is in great physical shape. ....... I hope this gets cleared up soon.

The tattoo that he has is a bit large, but it cannot be seen if he has a t-shirt on. He was going to get the word "honor" but changed his mind and did a cross. The only real significance was that he has always collected crosses, different kinds, and has always liked the look of them. This kid is a straight arrow all the way. Never been in any trouble. Always a good student, always very responsible, very honest and trustworthy. You don't meet many 18 year olds like him. He wants to join the Marines because he likes the idea of being in a position to help people. It's about the service to others. When he gets out he wants to be a policeman. This is stuff he has planned since literally 6 years old.

Thank you for all the responses. I will have my sister call another recruiter to double check. This recruiter seemed pretty sure of the new rule. He has been working with my nephew for a while now and was very thrilled to work with him. I'll keep you updated.

My nephew is 18. He has wanted to be a Marine since he was little. Not the Army or the Navy, but the Marines. Last year, after he turned 18, he wanted to get a tattoo. He asked his recruiter what the guidelines were. He was told that as long as the tattoo didn't show while wearing a shirt he was fine. He got a cross on a his chest. He went in today to sign some papers and start to get the ball rolling and his recruiter told him that the new guy in charge of the Marines (he had his picture up under Obama's) has instituted a new policy: no tattoos whatsoever. Even guys who are trying to reinlist will be turned away if they have tattoos. My nephew is devastated. This is all he has ever wanted. The recruiter did say that he could get 3 recommendation letters and then write an essay explaining why he got a tattoo, etc., but that he had, at best, a 30% chance of succeeding. I know there are a lot of military wives on this board. ANY suggestions you have would be wonderful!!

With all the military (and anti-military) talk around here lately I remembered a great story I saw on the 10 o'clock news a few years back. A year or two after 9/11 there was a story on the news about a flight with a very unruly passenger. The guy kept getting up, was being aggressive, talking to himself, etc. The stewardesses realized they were going to have to try and put this guy in restraints and that they needed help to do that. One stewardess went quietly up and down the aisles trying to catch the eye of any of the younger men to ask for help. None would help her. Some would not even look at her, she said. She then noticed an older gentleman, about 60, looking at her. In desperation she asked, "Can you help me?" He simply said, "U.S. Marine Corp, ma'am." She thought to herself, "That'll do." She told him that when she gave the signal, he was to rush to the back and try to wrestle the crazy guy to the ground while they put plastic handcuffs on him. She gave him the signal and they went into action. The crazy guy started to yell and scream about having a bomb and how the plane was going to go down and everyone was going to die. Passengers were crying and praying and very upset. They did manage to subdue the man and get him restrained. The plane landed with everyone safe but a bit shaken. The stewardess noticed, though, that the Marine's wife, who had been sitting next to him reading a book, never looked up from her book during any of the ruckus. She just kept on reading. When the stewardess asked her why, the wife simply said, "We have been married for almost 40 years, and he has been through just about everything. I knew if he went back there to deal with that guy there would be only one ending; he would step on the guy's neck and it would be all over. What I didn't know was how my book was going to end, so I wanted to keep reading." When they interviewed the Marine afterwards he was very cool and matter-of-fact about the whole thing. It was only when the reporter told him about his wife's comments did he swell with pride. He even got a little choked up. He said that she was a tough old bird and that she has stuck with him through thick and thin, and that he was very proud of her. He was proud of her! She was so sure in him that she could sit contentedly knowing he was in control of everything. I was in tears at the end of the newscast. They were a great couple. My 18 y.o. nephew is just about to join the Marines. I hope that someday he finds a wife as great as this. And I hope that someday he will be as brave and selfless as that gentleman.

I have long thought that I would like to train to be a court reporter and finally find myself in a place where I could go back to school to do this. Is anyone here a court reporter? Is the job market really as good as they say it is? Should I get my associates in court reporting, or just go for certification? I found a school that will do an associates online - is this feasible? Any feedback would be great!

We used their passports.

I, too, get extremely frustrated with picky eaters. I am sure there are a lot of instances where there is an underlying medical reason, but I also think a lot is just manners/upbringing gone bad. Both my girls eat just about anything. However, that was NOT always the case. When they were younger they would gag over certain foods. Sometimes that food would come back up again. If I gave in everytime my kids gagged over food they wouldn't eat anything either. They always made faces when something new was put in front of them, usually followed by gagging, but we just kept at it. Every now and then one of my daughters would make an announcement --- "I don't like nuts" or "I like chocolate, but not in cookies." I would simply tell them to get over it and move on. Guess what? They both like nuts and they both like chocolate chip cookies. Of course they like certain things over others, and certain brands, but refusal to eat certain brands? Let me think about that for a second ..... no. I always told them that my job was to make sure that when they went out into society that they weren't a pain in the butt to anyone. So, there would be no play dates until their manners were straight and we didn't have any picky eater issues. Better for me to deal with these issues until they are under control then for someone else to have to be saddled with it. Again, I am sure that there are a lot of kids with food issue that have a valid underlying cause. But there are also a lot of kids with food issues where the parents dropped the ball.

To those who think the cop should have left as soon as the guy showed his ID: What if the guy used to live there but now has a restraining order against him and shouldn't be there? What if the ID was fake? It really isnt as simple as "show me your ID and you can be on your way". There is much more to the situation that the policeman has to verify before he can leave. And, no, a person who is screaming and shouting at a policeman isn't automatically protected by free speech. Not if the policeman is investigating suspicous behavior. Not until it is clear what is going on. The policeman asked the professor to move outside because there was a report of 2 men breaking into the house, and the policeman only had 1 there with him. It was dangerous to be in the house not knowing who else was in there and if there were any weapons around. It was when the professor refused to move outside and kept being beligerent that he was arrested for disorderly conduct. Free speech is protected by the consitution, but being an ass and endangering people is not. You can be an ass in front of a policeman and call him what you want after the policeman is assured that he, you and everyone else at the scene are not in any danger.

I'll answer this one ...... as a Red Sox fan. It is the history of the team that helps define the fan loyalty. There is a certain ideaology to being a Red Sox fan. They lost for so many years, and in so many heartbreaking ways, that the fans started to take pride in their stoicism. We declare "this is the year" for 86 years! If you were a Red Sox fan, then you were a baseball fan because you loved the sport. You loved the idea of the underdog. The players change and are now coming from all over the world but the persona is still there. The team also takes on a personality. The Red Sox play in the oldest stadium in the country. There are no plans to replace it, nor do I think the fans would want that. They always had a smaller budget than the Yankees, yet went time and again against them, like a David and Goliath match. And when they do win against the Yankees, it is a big deal. It is a big deal because the Yankees have waaaay more money to throw at getting the good players. They have fancy new digs. They are like a machine. The Red Sox were always seen as a bunch of guys who play for the love of the sport and not for the big flashy salaries and fame. That is why we only put up with "Manny being Manny" for so long. Prima Donnas don't last too long in the Red Sox. A-Rod was trying to take a cut in pay to play for us. The league wouldn't allow it, so he went to the Yankees. He IS a Yankee, though. Slick, arrogant, huge, easy to dislike for his ego. He never would have lasted in the Red Sox dugout. Some of that image might have changed now that the Red Sox have won 2 World Series, but the basic concept is still there. My husband has always said that if he played in the major leagues, the ONLY team he would play for is the Red Sox because of the work ethic and underdog status they represent. You gotta love a Red Sox fan. We stuck with the concept of someday winning for 86 years, and finally it happened. If there is ANY sort of function at Fenway, whether it is a concert by the Boston Pops or a rock concert, at some point the chant "Yankees Suck" will break out. We will never forgive Babe Ruth for leaving. We believe in curses, and we believe that with enough hard work and gumption we can break the curses. We believe.

The original call came in from a neighbor because two men were seen jimming the door and forcing it open. That is the information the police had when they showed up. So, yes, his ID did say that he was in his own home, but what if there was a marital dispute and he no longer lived there? There could have been a restraining order on him. What if the other person with Professor Gates was not his driver but someone who forced him out of his car and then forced his way into the home? What if the ID was fake? So, no, just because you are in your home, until the police officer is reasonably satisfied (and I doubt a lot of time had passed to say it was unreasonable) you really cannot start flipping out and refuse subsequent requests. It is my impression that the police officer was taking a few moments to get all the angles and making sure that everything was as it seemed. It doesn't hurt to take a few moments. The go-to position should NOT have been to then immediately say he was being treated this way because he was black. Chris Rock made a spoof video about how not to get arrested by the police. One of the things he said was when you get pulled over, BE POLITE! Give the officer all the information he wants without swearing or being belligerent. The video had funny reenactments of how not to behave, but the message is the same.

I believe the pictures you see from the scene are ones taken by a bystander, not the news. There was also an interview with the policeman on the news last night. He says he absolutely will not apoligize. Regardless, his career is basically over now that he has been branded a "racist." It's a shame.

I live in the Boston area so this is all over our news. I really like Obama, but was shocked when I turned on the evening news to hear his statement regarding the whole Professor Gates/Officer Crowley incident. He acknowledged that he didn't know all the facts, but then went on to say that the Cambridge police acted "stupidly." He said that the professor presented his ID while in his home and promptly was arrested. WRONG! From what we do know now, and again not all the facts are known, is that the Professor presented his Harvard ID to the officer while in his foyer. According to Gates' own words the officer was looking at the ID and seemed unsure of his next step. Gates then said something like "are you trying to arrest me because I am black?" and became loud and abusive. The office told him to step out onto the front porch, and that is when all heck broke loose. He was then arrested for disorderly conduct. The most the President should have said was something along the lines of an unfortunate incident happening and hopefully a full and fair investigation will be launched and that both sides will be expected to coorperate and that perhaps we can learn that race relations in America is still a tricky thing blah blah blah. But to go on national TV and denounce a policeman without even knowing the facts? Not something I expected.

OMG, this is too cute! I just love corgis. Their legs just crack me up!

Unfortunately the behavior is spread out among a few of the girls. I think it is the type of thing where once one starts doing it and gets away with it, others start following. I also think the coach did not start it the way he wanted to finish it. He just is not stepping up and fixing all of this, but I also get the impression he is just sick of it all. I keep hearing parents *****ing him out because their daughter isn't playing the position she would like or he was too rough on her or whatever. If I was him I would be sick of it too. I am going to suggest, though, that he has a parent's meeting to try and sort some of this out. We have 2 weeks left on the season and 3 more tournaments to get through. I see it mostly as a parenting issue, though. Just like teachers should not have to deal with behavioral issues in the school, coaches should not have to deal with these issues on the field.