Life-condensed

Four Ounces of Energy

Did I mention that Kevin’s parents sell Reliv? And that they sort of, um, talked us into being distributors?

*charming smile*

Would you like to buy 24K from us?

*charming smile*

24K is an energy drink. No caffeine. No sugar. It’s chock full of B vitamins and it’s supposed to not only give you energy, but mental clarity, too.

Here’s Reliv’s blurb:

Our daily activities zap our energy and can leave us feeling worn out, unfocused and stressed. Turning to high-sugar caffeine drinks only brings an artificial lift — and a hard crash. But now there’s a healthy way to keep your edge: 24K™, Reliv’s first ever ready-to-drink product. Formulated with a synergistic blend of 24 active ingredients, 24K taps into your body’s natural vitality to provide energy, focus and stress relief. And with no caffeine and only 5 calories per serving, it’s healthy energy for body, mind and spirit. Available in a multi-serving 28-ounce bottle and in two-ounce “double-shots” for when you’re on the go.

I’ve tried it. In fact, I drank half of one today. (The little shots are two ounces and you’re supposed to drink one ounce at a time, twice a day). One ounce is all I can handle. Any more and I get a headache. I think it’s the B vitamins that does it to me because I’ve had the 5-Hour Energy drinks before and they do the same thing to me.

I’ll be honest – it’s not the greatest tasting energy drink out there (probably because it doesn’t have any sugar), but it seems to do the trick. I DO feel more mentally alert after drinking it. It sort of tastes like bubblegum when you first drink it, but the after taste is not that great. Kevin thinks it tastes like the medicine dentists give you to numb your gums.

Are you tempted? HA!

But seriously. It’s not the best tasting thing out there, but it does seem to work. At least, I think so. And it DEFINITELY gives Kevin more energy. (Like the man NEEDS more energy). And the best part? You don’t crash like you do when you come off an energy drink.

At any rate, if you would like to try the little two ounce bottles, I’m your go-to gal. Just give me a holler and I’ll set you up.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to go wash some dishes, mop the floors, clean the bathrooms, finish the laundry, chase the neighbor’s dog, write a book, run a marathon, direct traffic, achieve world peace …

Politics

Do Unions Have a Choke Hold on America?

Well? Do they?

(Warning: Rant ahead)

Do we not agree that one of the biggest reasons jobs are being outsourced overseas is because American workers are demanding to be paid an unacceptable dollar amount for the work they have been hired to do and the companies simply can’t justify, or afford, paying those salaries and are forced to go elsewhere or go bankrupt?

And if employees know they can’t be fired, or that it will be difficult and/or costly to fire them, will they have the motivation to do the best job they can possibly do? Or will they simply do what is absolutely necessary and really not care what sort of impact their poor work performance will make on the product or person they work for?

Also. Businesses actively avoid states where unions are strong. They simply don’t want the headache of having to deal with union demands and terms or have to deal with repercussions if they propose change. (Like the tantrums being thrown in Wisconsin right now). This in turn hurts commerce in the affected state which trickles down to less revenue (i.e. taxes) and fewer jobs.

Because I don’t know a lot about unions, have never had any experience with a union, I decided to do a little research (as opposed to just taking the word of the media – both conservative AND liberal).

A labor union is an organization of workers that have banded together to achieve common goals such as better working conditions. The labor union, through its leadership, bargains with the employer on behalf of union members and negotiates labor contracts (collective bargaining) with employers. This may include the negotiation of wages, work rules, complaint procedures, rules governing hiring, firing and promotion of workers, benefits, workplace safety and policies. The agreements negotiated by the union leaders are binding on the rank and file members and the employer and in some cases on other non-member workers.

Over the last three hundred years, many labor unions have developed into a number of forms, influenced by differing political objectives. Activities of labor unions vary, but may include:

* Provision of benefits to members: Early trade unions, like Friendly Societies, often provided a range of benefits to insure members against unemployment, ill health, old age and funeral expenses. In many developed countries, these functions have been assumed by the state; however, the provision of professional training, legal advice and representation for members is still an important benefit of trade union membership.
* Collective bargaining: Where trade unions are able to operate openly and are recognized by employers, they may negotiate with employers over wages and working conditions.
* Industrial action: Trade unions may enforce strikes or resistance to lockouts in furtherance of particular goals.
* Political activity: Trade unions may promote legislation favorable to the interests of their members or workers as a whole. To this end they may pursue campaigns, undertake lobbying, or financially support individual candidates or parties (such as the Labour Party in Britain) for public office.

I’m all for protecting the worker. There are indeed companies (*cough-Wal-Mart-cough*) that treat their employees unfairly from time to time. (And I used to work for Wal-Mart. I KNOW what goes on there, first hand. Though to be perfectly fair to Wal-Mart, it’s not as bad as people make it out to be, either. You have to take into account that the majority of people nowadays? Don’t want to work, period. They simply want to be paid to show up – come on now, you know it’s true).

But here’s where I have a problem with unions – they get too big, too powerful and if one chooses to work for a union, individuals are pretty much forced to sign their rights away. The unions dictate their benefits, their salaries, and who they should vote for in elections. This in turn, “buys” politicians. Unions pour money into a Democrat coffer, (do unions ever back a Republican? I’m just asking), helping that candidate to get elected, and in turn, the Democrat votes in favor of union demands in Congress. The classic, “you scratch my back, and I’ll scratch yours” scenerio. (And I’m not just targeting Unions [I can still say, “target,” can’t I? I’m trying hard to keep a civil discourse here], I know that lobbyists do the same thing for Republicans and I have to say, I think the whole thing stinks and just another reason why politics are crooked). I, for one, am not willing to give up my personal rights all in the name of “protection.” My “protection” is doing the best job I can do and impress my bosses enough that they WANT to keep me, not because they HAVE to keep me or risk World War III.

I’m not knocking unions. It’s a free country. If someone chooses to join a union, be my guest. Just understand that by doing so, one is pretty much forfeiting his/her voice, too. But again, if someone is okay with that, then who am I to judge?

I’ve been reading a lot about the Teacher’s Union fight in Wisconsin.

But before I go any further, let’s clear up a few issues:

  • Right-to-Work means:

    The principle that all Americans must have the right to join a union if they choose to, but none should ever be forced to affiliate with a union in order to get or keep a job.

    In essence, the employee has the option of joining a union, but not doing so doesn’t mean they won’t get the job. Missouri is NOT a right-to-work state. (Which hurts Missouri because most companies will not look twice at a state that is not right-to-work. However, “the Missouri Senate is expecting a floor debate on right to work legislation around the March spring break for lawmakers.” I predict the same sort of reaction as Wisconsin. This should be interesting). I wonder if there is any quality of education correlation between right-to-work states and “forced-unionism.” Doesn’t it make you wonder?

    Right-to-work advocates say states with those laws on the books are more conducive to economic growth. A recent report in the libertarian Cato Institute’s Cato Journal written by Ohio University economics Prof. Richard Vedder found that about 4.7 million Americans moved to right-to-work states between 2000 and 2008.

    The article said pay is higher in non-right-to-work states — but, employing an economic model, Vedder estimated that right-to-work states saw economic growth increase 23 percent faster between 1977 and 2007 than non-right-to-work states. Source

Whereas …

  • Collective Bargaining:

    Collective bargaining is a type of negotiation used by employees to work with their employers. During a collective bargaining period, workers’ representatives approach the employer and attempt to negotiate a contract which both sides can agree with. Typical issues covered in a labor contract are hours, wages, benefits, working conditions, and the rules of the workplace. Once both sides have reached a contract that they find agreeable, it is signed and kept in place for a set period of time, most commonly three years. The final contract is called a collective bargaining agreement, to reflect the fact that it is the result of a collective bargaining effort.

    In essence, the employee is completely out of the loop and relies solely on the union organizers to negotiate the above conditions. Let’s hope those union organizers have their members’ best interest in mind.

In case you’re not sure what the teachers’ union is up in arms about, here is what Governor Walker has proposed:

The long and short of it is, Wisconsin is dead broke, and Governor Scott Walker is looking to put an end to the gross fiscal mismanagement that got us to this bad, bad place. One of the ways he aims to do that is to ask the state’s public employees to start chipping in toward their benefits. They currently pay not one thin dime toward their pensions (for which there is zero vesting period) and a teeny, tiny little contribution toward their healthcare coverage. This would be bumped up to a 5.8 percent pension contribution (in line with the national average) and a 12 percent healthcare contribution (half the average paid by a private sector worker).

If you think the unions are unhappy about that, you should hear them on the following provisions:

Collective bargaining – The bill would make various changes to limit collective bargaining for most public employees to wages. Total wage increases could not exceed a cap based on the consumer price index (CPI) unless approved by referendum. Contracts would be limited to one year and wages would be frozen until the new contract is settled. Collective bargaining units are required to take annual votes to maintain certification as a union. Employers would be prohibited from collecting union dues and members of collective bargaining units would not be required to pay dues. These changes take effect upon the expiration of existing contracts. Local law enforcement and fire employees, and state troopers and inspectors would be exempt from these changes.

Source

In essence, Governor Walker is asking the Teachers to pay toward THEIR OWN RETIREMENT BENEFITS AND HEALTH CARE. How unreasonable is that?? (That was sarcasm). Talk about looking a gift horse in the mouth. The state is broke. The tax payers have been taxed to the brink of bankruptcy, in fact, many people are unemployed and yet these teachers have the audacity to complain because they have to pay into their own retirement and health care? At least they HAVE jobs!! Talk about insensitive and selfish!

Let’s not forget the alternative here: Governor Walker is trying to help these teachers out because if something isn’t done, the government will be forced to layoff thousands of workers because they simply don’t have the money to pay them. What’s the lesser of two evils here?

And yet, they somehow expect the state to come up with the money it needs to pay them. Where do they think the money is coming from? Though some people honestly don’t believe the state is broke, that it is, in fact, just a ploy to somehow punish them what they’re due (??), most people understand that the state is broke and most people assume, because it’s always happened this way in the past, that the state will kowtow to their protests and rob Peter to pay Paul. In other words, the state will cut other programs in order to pay them off.

THIS is what is wrong with unions. THIS is why people are getting sick of unions. Because when they don’t get their way, they throw temper tantrums, bully and walk off the job leaving the children of Wisconsin high and dry. If they TRULY cared about the children, they would go back to their classrooms and teach them, not flood the streets, with some of the children in tow, I might add (and coincidentally, how despicable is that?? Most of those kids have no idea what they’re even picketing).

Whatever happened to the tax payer? They are, after all, footing the bill. Why doesn’t the tax payer have any say in this? Because the unions won’t allow it, that’s why. Taxpayers are just the money machine – screw ’em.

And what about the weenies (Democrats) who left town so they wouldn’t have to weigh in on this controversial topic? They fled because they owe the unions for electing them, which puts them between a rock and a hard place. And they’re staying away so the chaos can build because that’s how the Democrats operate. They thrive on chaos because they like to take advantage of people’s confusion and cash in on high emotions to bully people into doing what they want to do.

It’s sickening.

And here are two more things I find sickening about this whole ordeal:

The Democratic National Committee’s Organizing for America arm — the remnant of the 2008 Obama campaign — is playing an active role in organizing protests against Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker’s attempt to strip most public employees of collective bargaining rights. And Obama’s political wing — an extension of the SEIU, it would appear — is still hawking the protests. According to Politico’s Ben Smith, it has published at least 54 tweets promoting the rallies.Source

With all due respect, Mr. President, butt out. This is a state issue, not a federal issue.

And the “alleged” fake doctor notes that teachers are collecting by the fistfuls so they can lie to their employers and excuse themselves from their duties. If true, what a great example we’re setting for our children, eh?

I don’t know guys. This is messed up. I know that unions CAN be a positive thing, but it seems, over the years, they’ve gotten too big for their britches and they are just more trouble then they’re worth, not to mention, they’re hurting our country with their unreasonable, and self-entitled demands.

Maybe we’ve reached a point where it’s time to get rid of the unions. Or at the very least, get rid of what exists now and go back to the drawing board. I wonder how that would affect jobs and the quality of our education system?

At any rate, I predict this is just the tip of the iceberg. If (and that’s a big IF), Republicans stay strong, this country might actually see some positive change.

Sunday Stuff

SOC: I’m not Angry!

I can’t talk to my oldest son at all.

Every time I try, he accuses me of being angry.

“Are you mad?”

“Why are you mad?”

“There you go, being mad again.”

I’m not sure how many different ways he can ask me if I’m angry. I’m not sure how many ways I can respond with, “No, I’m not!”

I’m passionate. Perhaps that comes across as angry. I have a semi-permanent frown – I can’t help it, my face is crooked. My voice can get harsh – I don’t mean it to, I just have a harsh-sounding voice, I guess.

But it bothers me. It bothers me that he thinks I’m always angry. And that that’s somehow okay for him to be angry all the time.

It bothers me that he’s so sensitive to my moods. Even my subtle moods. The boy mirrors his moods after me and that scares me. Because I never want to be, I’ve never asked to be, his role model. I suck as a role model. I’m flawed in so many ways, I can’t even list them – there are simply too many.

So now I’m self-conscious about my reactions to … everything. Do I come off as angry? I know when I worked at my last job, I had several people tell me (after they had gotten to know me), that I had a stand-offish air about me, that I was perceived as a snob.

And in some ways, I have to agree with that. But I’m not REALLY like that. At least, not all the time. I’m not sure how I can change that perception of me in public. I’m REALLY not sure how to change my son’s perception of me now.

Who wants a mom who’s angry all the time?

I’m not angry all the time.

Am I?

*ding* Time’s up.

#SOCsunday

This was my 5 minute Stream of Consciousness Sunday post. It’s five minutes of your time and a brain dump. Want to try it?

Abundant Life

Teaching: 25 Reasons Why Salvation Is Permanent For Christians

Every Sunday I provide videos and valuable links to the Truth or Tradition teachings. We’ve been following the Truth or Tradition teachings for many years now and they have truly blessed our family. We have found peace and happiness through our beliefs and we walk confidently for God. My hope, by passing on this information to you, is that what you find here, or on the Truth or Tradition website, will guide you to a better, more blessed and abundant life.

If you would like to read my views on religion and how we got started with the ministry, you can read this.

Let’s get started:

There is no subject in Scripture that has more doctrinal and practical importance than that of “salvation.” It is a matter of life and death, both literally and figuratively, because both the quality of our life now and everlasting life are at stake. Unfortunately, Christendom is divided over many aspects of the salvation offered in Christ, most notably whether or not it can be lost because a Christian failed to continue to have faith, or sinned. What follows are the main reasons why we have concluded that salvation is permanent for Christians, and that once acquired by faith in Christ it cannot be lost, forfeited or nullified by subsequent behaviors, attitudes or events.

The following are 25 reasons why salvation is permanent for Christians:

1. The Greek word translated “salvation” (soteria) denotes “deliverance and preservation” [1]; “Safety, preservation from danger or destruction. It is contrasted with death (2 Cor. 7:10) and destruction (Phil. 1:28)” [2]. It also means “wholeness” or “health.” Fundamentally, we are saved from two things: sin and death. We are saved from sin and death by justification and the corresponding gift of everlasting life.

Therefore we define “salvation” as a state of being saved, rescued or delivered from something that threatens death or destruction, that is, being brought to a place of safety. The Hebrew word for “salvation” also means a place of safety (yasha). Logically, if we are still in jeopardy of somehow losing this salvation, we are not in a very “safe” place.

2. “Justification” is the judicial act of God whereby the sinner is declared free from the penalty of sin by his faith in the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ. This act is done “freely” (i.e., “without a cause”) by His grace (Rom. 3:24). Therefore our faith does not cause God to grant us salvation, but provides a condition upon which He can do His work. Without some condition for us to meet, we could not choose to receive it. In His grace and mercy, God chose faith (trust), the simplest act of the human mind.

It is therefore by His work, not ours, that we are made righteous, which is the state of being justified. We receive this status by grace through faith in His work on our behalf. Since our works did not earn for us this status, our works or lack of works cannot negate it either, once we have received it. It is not logical to argue that what is acquired exclusively by the gracious work of another and deposited to our account can be negated by our subsequent works or lack of works.

3. Faith is not works. Works are not faith. “Faith” is distinguishable from “faithfulness.” To continue to have faith is “faithfulness,” and this is different than one-time faith (trust). Faithfulness consists of works, and is itself a work. If justification requires continued faith, then there is work involved in maintaining a state of justification. This negates the fact that justification comes to us simply by trusting in Christ’s work on our behalf.

4. Salvation has both present and future aspects, and its various usages must be determined from each context. It is present in that we receive the “earnest,” or guarantee, of this future wholeness in the gift of holy spirit when we were born again. This spirit is the proof that we are presently God’s purchased possession, for the down payment on our behalf has already been made. That salvation occurs as a present reality is proven by the following scriptures: (Acts 2:47; Eph. 2:5 and 8).

Salvation is future in two ways. First, our “salvation” is in a process of becoming, in that we are being made whole as we are transformed by the renewing of our minds and the working of the holy spirit within us, making us more Christ-like. This is the sense in which we are continually being delivered from our situations and circumstances (Phil. 1:20). In its ultimate future aspect, “salvation” is our future complete deliverance from the effects of sin in our bodies and our environments by our acquisition of new immortal bodies. This future salvation is set in opposition to “wrath” (1 Thess. 5:8-9).

5. It is not logical to argue that we are able to pay any of the debt demanded for our salvation. It must be paid for by another or we are not able to acquire it. As the down payment was made by another, so must the remaining “payment” be made by another. This “payment in full” is called “propitiation,” referring to the completed work of Jesus Christ. To argue that Christ did not make the payment in full, but requires us to make the remaining payments to ensure our salvation, is to be what the Scripture calls “an enemy of the cross of Christ” (Phil. 3:18). [For further study read “How can a man atone for the sins of mankind?”]

6. Ephesians 1:5 says that God has predestined us to be “adopted” as His sons through Jesus Christ. What adoption means must be determined by the cultural norms of the First Century. Adoption was a very binding legal contract in the Roman Empire, more binding even than natural birth. An adopted son was a full heir, and could never be disinherited after adoption. A natural-born son, however, could be disinherited. The difference is choice. A father could have a son by accident as the by-product of sexual intercourse with a woman, but a child could be adopted only by deliberate action on the part of the adopting parent.

Thus, the metaphor of “adoption” emphasizes the deliberate choice exercised by God in choosing us to be His sons. This is also borne out by the language of the immediate context of Ephesians 1:5: “in accordance with His pleasure and will,” “to the praise of His glorious grace, which He has freely given us,” “in accordance with the riches of God’s grace that He lavished on us with all wisdom and understanding,” and “He made known unto us the mystery [secret] of His will according to His good pleasure which He purposed in Christ.” Clearly this was a decision entered into by God with complete understanding and commitment. To argue that man’s sin can negate the express determination and accomplishment of God is ridiculous.

7. Once a person accepts the relationship of adoption granted by God’s grace on his behalf, such a “contract” is binding upon God to fulfill, despite the contractee’s faithlessness. The emphasis of the word “adoption” is upon God’s unilateral decision to make the believer “His son.” Adoption is generally a unilateral, contractual relationship, and permission need not be acquired by the person being adopted. Therefore, the relationship created by God’s contractual bond cannot be disannulled by the behavior of the adoptee.

8. In Scripture, salvation is compared to a birthing by seed (“born again,” “incorruptible seed,” etc.). As a father remains the father of his child by virtue of the permanent effect of his seed upon the egg, so God’s fatherhood remains permanent by the effect of His grace upon the believer who once believes in Christ as his Savior. Therefore, the conversion experience, like conception, is an irreversible process.

9. Salvation comes by way of one confessing with his mouth Jesus as Lord and believing in his heart the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Romans 10:9 says to the person who does this: “Thou shalt be saved,” which grammatically is referring to a present state of being, not future. The bedrock of this salvation is a historical fact verified by eye-witnesses, the highest form of legal testimony, even more compelling than a confession. God grounds salvation in belief of an historical fact. This indicates that He desires to provide man a basis for rational conviction that can withstand the challenges of blasphemers, atheists, and historical revisionists. Salvation depends upon written testimony by witnesses. On top of that is the presence of holy spirit, the witness within, which provides an even greater testimony than if we were eyewitnesses ourselves.

10. Scripture says that, “with the mouth confession is made unto salvation” (Rom. 10:10). Our belief in and confession of Jesus as Lord is not the cause of our salvation, but rather the condition we meet that enables God to save us. Since the believer does not save himself, neither can he “unsave” himself.

11. Salvation is the guarantee of life in the age to come. This life is a gift (Rom. 6:23), as opposed to death, which is the “wages” paid for the work of sin. If this life is a gift, there is no merit required on the part of the recipient. He is simply the object of another’s love and desire to bless him. If some merit were required, the fallen human heart would boast about it (Eph. 2:8 and 9). If the gift can be kept only by faithfulness, then it is not truly a gift. A gift, by definition, becomes the property of the recipient, once he has received it. He can then appreciate it and use it for good, or ignore it or even step on it.

12. To be “saved” (sozo) also means “to be made whole,” and this is what is being referred to in 1 Corinthians 15:2, a verse sometimes used in an attempt to prove that a person can lose his salvation. The verse begins with the affirmation that the Corinthians had received the Gospel and taken a stand upon it. Therefore the salvation being referred to— “you are saved if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you”—must mean the opposite of “in vain,” or to no purpose. How could one be saved to “no purpose” if the meaning of salvation as “rescuing from death or destruction is employed”? That is surely purpose aplenty, but if salvation here means “wholeness” or “soundness,” then the meaning of the verse is that their salvation would not be in evidence, not that it wouldn’t be really in their possession.

This is the same usage of salvation as in Philippians 2:12, in which we are exhorted to “work out our salvation with fear and trembling.” There is no guarantee that, once having been saved by grace through faith in the Gospel, we can enjoy the fruits of this salvation without continued faith in the efficacy of this Gospel. The same truth is found in Hebrews 4:2: “The message [Gospel] they heard was of no value to them because those who heard did not combine it with faith.” We must value our salvation and walk in it to enjoy the fruits of it, as the parable of the sower makes plain (Matt. 13:3-9).

13. “Thou shalt be saved” (Rom. 10:9) means that the whole of man (spirit, soul, body) is saved, and not a part only. 1 Peter 1:9 refers to “the salvation of the soul,” but this is clearly the usage of the figure of speech Synecdoche, in which a part of a person stands for the whole person. The salvation referred to in 1 Peter 1:9 is that salvation unique to our present administration, which could not be seen in Old Testament Scripture (verses 10-12). Salvation by faithfulness to perform the works of the Law was well known, so this salvation must be referring to something qualitatively different.

1 Corinthians 5:5 is the only verse of Scripture referring to the saving of the “spirit,” and we agree with E .W. Bullinger that this usage of pneuma is equivalent to “soul” and refers to the whole person rather than a part of him. The point in the context is that the man’s flesh must be “reckoned dead” (cp. Rom. 6:11-13) and his fleshly deed righteously condemned.

14. God has from the beginning chosen us to salvation through sanctification of the spirit and belief of the truth (1 Thess. 2:13). If God has chosen us to it, then our choice is limited to either accepting or rejecting it, not making it happen by our good behavior or negating it by our perverse behavior once we have accepted it.

15. Because some Christians do return to their sinful ways after once being “saved,” some argue that they were not really “saved” in the first place. By this argument they try to answer the difficulty presented by those often termed as “backsliders.” But many “backsliders” report that they have still been able to hear God’s voice, speak in tongues and manifest other evidences of salvation even while behaviorally outside of God’s will. It is taught that “backsliders,” like the prodigal son, need to be reconciled to God once again. If the permanence of salvation were understood, it would be unnecessary to teach either that they had to be saved again or that they were never actually saved in the first place.

The doctrine that they were not really saved is as specious as stating that you can lose your salvation, and results in the same uncertainty, despair, and confusion. It is noteworthy that the word “backslider” is found only in Jeremiah (3:6,8,11,12,22, et al) and is never used regarding anyone in the Church Administration.

You can read the rest of the list here.

If you have any questions, or would like to learn more about God’s wonderful message, please visit the Truth or Tradition website. You can also keep track of the ministry through their Facebook page, their YouTube Channel, or follow them on Twitter.

Thanks for reading.

(Comments have been turned off. The information is here to inform and bless you. God granted you the gift of free will – take it or leave it).

More from Write From Karen

Saturday Stuff

Sacrifice

“For you.”

They stopped at the street corner. Daryl handed her a pink package wrapped in a white bow.

“What? How did you …” Shelly blinked and took the package.

He gave her a sheepish smile.

“Daryl. I don’t want to be a couple,” she said sternly.

He shrugged. “We’re friends. Friends give each other birthday gifts”

She pulled the card out while they walked across the street.

“I’d catch a grenade for ya.”

She laughed. “You and your military references. I swear …”

A car shot through the intersection. With lightening speed, Daryl pushed her out of the way.

The car struck him.

She screamed.

.

.

.

*************************

Write up to 100 words, fact or fiction….

This is a themed writing meme hosted by Jenny Matlock. The goal is to write something that does not exceed 100 words (not including said prompt). The prompt is in italics above.