Here’s a glimpse at Sandra Bushman’s manipulative psychosis. She provided “authorities” with an annotated list of folks her kids’ dad had communicated with by email. One might ask to start, what gives her the impulse to conduct such surveillance (keeping up with a nefarious government agency?). Second, why is private exchange of ideas a “threat” in Bushman’s mind? One worth slamming dad in jail—on a misdemeanor charge with an unprecedented $100,000 bail (so dad couldn’t possibly defend himself, among other things). Other obvious questions arise. But let’s just take a quick look at her comments. One guy she marks as the potential honors social science teacher at the kids’ school. Well, he is—now; he was at another school. Yet he’s also someone who dad got to know by coaching his wonderful son in Christ-centered basketball in 2011. Dad coached with one of his sons and a good friend of his son to give them a positive opportunity. By all accounts, coaches, parents, kids, league officials, it was a positive experience with no untoward incidents. Anyway, a good guy who had a decent relationship with her kids’ dad, including a shared love of history. Another guy is a teacher and administrator at a local college. Dad got to know him through years of coaching youth basketball (both are basketball junkies), having kids attend school together, taking one of his sons to lessons at the Playhouse where they’d chat as his daughter was likewise involved, and he interviewed and eagerly employed dad for a position at the college—among other connections. This relationship, too, Bushman sullies. Dad still sends this guy information (articles and such) on higher ed since they’re both concerned about it, as people should be. Moving on. There’s a kid who has had some tough times thrown his way. He was friends with one of dad’s son’s best friend, and they were having serious problems. Ugly conflicts they needed to sort out. The son, the son’s best friend, and the stressed kid all asked dad to mediate. As did parents. So he did. Dad also got wind that things were becoming very dicey otherwise (and they remain so, apparently) in the kid’s life. This alarmed at least a couple of parents, and again dad was asked to, yet had already begun, to aid. The kid was appreciative, as were others. As a footnote, dad didn’t really want these tasks or look eagerly to spending time on this, yet basic compassion and responsibility prevailed. As they should, one hopes. Bushman? She characterizes this relationship as “weird” and a true expression of “instability” by dad—yet like the others, she’s completely in the dark. Or chooses to be to keep her cant going. And finally, for now, she reserves her longest venomous screed for a man who was key in guiding one of the boys towards perhaps his single biggest accomplishment—one that gave the son confidence, joy, coordination, opportunity to teach and appreciate patience, and more. At one point dad asked the son, “Who do you really love, other than your family?” The quick reply was this man. And he was quite effusive on this point. Curiously, Sandra Bushman has completely cut this mentor/teacher/human out of the son’s life. And in a very nasty and vindictive way. Here we see a very toxic mix of bitterness, ignorance, and prejudice operating psychotically. So who, dare say, is “unstable,” “erratic,” and deliberately escalated her manipulative attacks on the children’s dad? And on the children? Abusively so. And this has been going on for over a decade, arguably since the 1980s. Facts. Suppressed facts that even her paramour doesn’t know, or won’t acknowledge. Please excuse the brevity. My stomach is turning.
Posted on: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 18:29:36 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015