I have tons of tulip and daffodil bulbs to trade for some scrapbooking materials. I have a 3 and 1 yr old little girls and am working on scrapbooks with/for both of the girls. I also have iris and some herbs if you are interested. Also have some interesting hens and chicks and sedums. Stacie

A nice column in the Joplin Globe from an area farmer. It makes one think, why did the legislature last year make it where foreign corporations could own farms in Missouri - (was specifically for a 50,000 acre Chinese Hog producer) yet not give the people of Missouri the right to vote if we want foreign ownership of farms in our state? Yet they want us to vote in this so-called right to farm that takes the word "Missouri" farmer out and just leaves the word farmer, why because it's for foreign farmers who are really giant corporations with huge acreage, it has nothing to do with family farms. Article starts here: Darvin Bentlage, guest columnist: Amendment 1: Who’s confusing whom?By Darvin Bentlage 08/01/2014 4:55 PM Something is terribly wrong when the language on the ballot differs so profoundly from the actual language of the amendment. The ballot language makes voters think they are voting to protect the “rights of Missouri citizens,” but the only mention of Missouri in the text of Amendment 1 refers to the Missouri economy. “Citizens” are missing entirely from the amendment. Clearly, legislators of this state believe that corporate farming benefits the economy more than independent family farmers. Missouri’s Constitution consists of about 65,000 words compared to 7,500 words in the U.S. Constitution. The federal amendments are clear and definitive while Amendment 1 is vague as to what will infringe on farming even referring to provisions of Article VI to appear to protect local control. Agriculture has changed immensely in the past 20 years and who knows what lies down the road? What about water rights, like those being developed in Kansas that look to the future preservation of water for drinking and for agriculture? Adopting environmental regulations that protect natural resources as Arkansas has? Food safety, health impacts, labeling …the list goes on. Amendment 1 will forever leave the decisions about the definition of what is infringement and what is protected under Article VI to the courts paid for by taxpayers. Darvin Bentlage, guest columnist: Amendment 1: Who’s confusing whom?By Darvin Bentlage 08/01/2014 4:55 PM Something is terribly wrong when the language on the ballot differs so profoundly from the actual language of the amendment. The ballot language makes voters think they are voting to protect the “rights of Missouri citizens,” but the only mention of Missouri in the text of Amendment 1 refers to the Missouri economy. “Citizens” are missing entirely from the amendment. Clearly, legislators of this state believe that corporate farming benefits the economy more than independent family farmers. Missouri’s Constitution consists of about 65,000 words compared to 7,500 words in the U.S. Constitution. The federal amendments are clear and definitive while Amendment 1 is vague as to what will infringe on farming even referring to provisions of Article VI to appear to protect local control. Agriculture has changed immensely in the past 20 years and who knows what lies down the road? What about water rights, like those being developed in Kansas that look to the future preservation of water for drinking and for agriculture? Adopting environmental regulations that protect natural resources as Arkansas has? Food safety, health impacts, labeling …the list goes on. Amendment 1 will forever leave the decisions about the definition of what is infringement and what is protected under Article VI to the courts paid for by taxpayers. Here is a link that might be useful: read the rest here

Not many people are doing this now. I think you take a hardcover book and take out some/all the pages. Or fold them and put scrapbook stuff on them. If I remember I deceided against it as it seemed bulky and messy. You could google scrapbooks-hardcover books and see what comes up.

"and sometimes it is better for children to be from a broken home than watching parents in bad marriage or other nonsense." Yes. There is such a weird attitude, though, and that frustrates me. There is a girl on my DD's swim team---her grandparents own the pool/small club. Anyway, this girl is now a young adolescent and her father runs a lot of the meets. (This girl is ranked #16 in the NATION in certain events, she's AMAZING.) Her parents are divorced, divorced when she was little. Her father, who is at EVERY MEET, running them, cheering, etc--is remarried with two younger kids. The girl's mother is also at every meet and clearly has a good relationship with her ex, as they talk, often sit together, etc. But I heard some of the other moms talking last year and someone mentioned that the girl's father is remarried and has two other kids. And one of the mom's responses was, "Ohhhh, how SAD for her." And then a couple others chimed in about how sad it was, how awful for this poor girl, etc. WHY? Because her dad is clearly an involved and loving father? Because her mom is an involved and loving mother? And because she has two half sibilings whom she spends a great deal of time with at her father's house? What's sad? I mean, I understand and get that *in an ideal world* the divorce wouldn't have happened. I understand that. But this girl is loved and happy and successful and I would bet SHE doesn't think too much of it, aside from the occasional "I wish that were different, Gosh, it sucks to go back and foth" thought. KWIM? I get it, too, with my DD. Sometimes when people hear that her bio-dad is totally absent, they'll say how SAD it is. And they look at me weird when I say, "No, DD is really happy, she's fine, she doesn't know any different!" It's true, though---and she IS better off without him in her life. He is irresponsible and has issues with drinking and it's just....better this way. When she grows up and is ready--if she wants---to meet him, that will be HER choice. And it will be because she's ready. And is it a "cross to bear" that other people don't have to deal with? Well, yeah. But EVERYONE has pain in life. Everyone. We all have things that are hard and difficult and we try as best we can to overcome them. And to find the joy in life. Off my soapbox now.