fungal_gourmet

I've been married for almost 10 years. We have 3 kids, 2 boys ages 5 and 7, as well as a 2.5yo girl. We have lots of issues and I think the time has come for divorce. We live in GA and I am the biological father. I would like to obtain legal custody of all three, which I know is an uphill battle. For a while I have been considering keeping a file of things such as getting drunk and not getting my son to school, injuries that have happened due to her incompetence, leaving inappropriate items accessible to children, etc. Unfortunately, I have not done so as of yet. A few weeks ago I found a straw with powdery residue in it. I threw it away, later that day I found a small zip type envelope, with the corner missing(in my private backyard). The next day there was another straw in my car. I got rid of all and never said anything. We rarely speak anyway. Then this morning I found a small blue pill in my kitchen floor. I looked it up and found that its 30mg oxycodone, right there where my kids could get it. I put it somewhere safe, but what kind of documentation will help me build a case against her as an unfit mother?

I have been wanting a new pair of hiking boots, but haven't had the money. I just got a job that requires me to have steel toed boots. The job is only for a few weeks, but I may be required to wear them on other jobs in the future. Regardless of which style I get, I will most likely be buying Red Wing boots. On their website, I see they have steel toed hiking boots. What is the purpose of a steel toed hiking boot? Why would a hiker need to have steel toed boots? Wouldn't that just be more weight? I see that some of their hiking boots have aluminum toes, claiming to be 33% lighter than steel with the same protection. Would these boots be good potential hiking boots as well as suitable for construction or should I just focus on work boots and buy myself some hiking boots at a later date?

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2010/02/20/jef...

You have a country full of people who are willing to die for their convictions, whether right or wrong. Why would anyone reasonably expect that sanctions that may make their lives a little tougher will deter them from their goals?

or would it hurt their feelings to be called "it". Now they are not even allowed to use harsh language against them. Are you serious?

Obama gives shout outs before reflecting on a national tragedy, he recognizes who is "in the house" , he props his feet up on the oval office desk

http://undhimmi.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/oba...

and he lets his wife go out looking like this

http://www.motivatedphotos.com/?id=68933

do they have not an ounce of respect for the dignity of the office?

supply at Fort Jackson was an act of terrorism? Mr. President, is this just another isolated incident?

That being basically destroy the democratic party by exposing liberal/progressives for what they are.

Goodman's playbook. I find it hilarious that he rebuffed the 0bama. I gain a little respect for any politician who would grow a set and to the same.

supply at Fort Jackson was an act of terrorism? Mr. President was this just another isolated incident?

Since it is possible to use a plane to kill people, should they be outlawed? Or if planes are outlawed will only outlaws have planes?

This is for my 1st graders science homework. He has answered every question correctly, but this one stumped him. The only reason I can think of is to hold up heaver leaves. Can anyone help?

Patrick Kennedy decided not to run for reelection. Evan Bayh is not going to run even though he states he could win easily. Even the vice president's son had reneged on running for office, almost assuring the democrats will lose a seat. There have been others too, from both parties. Do they know about something that is coming in the near future that has influenced their decision? Maybe they don't want to get the blame for America failing as a country?

On the radio this morning, a reporter stated that instead of eliminating terrorists as was once the standard, there was now a move to capture them with the intentions of "squeezing" them for information. Would they read them their rights before "squeezing" them?

By our government running up debt for the next two generations of tax payers, really taxation without representation. I mean they are creating a tax burden for people who haven't even been born yet and have no say since the yet to be born are unable to vote against them.

Clinton had a chance to get Osama and didn't chose not to, so wasn't he the reason Bush inherited the war on terror?