Frugal Mama article in today's Washington Post

[Anonymous]

Dear Mean and Frugal Mamas,

Time to move on?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wonder if she'll get a real job when her kids are all in school.

Or if she'll put the ol' ute back to work so she can 'have to stay home' for another few years.

I wonder whether it is any of your business.

It's just killing you people that she has not come here in a tizzy to frantically defend her lifestyle. OMG someone who doesn't care about what DCUM thinks! What is her kryptonite? What kind of insults can we sling around to lure her into caring about this crap??? Good try, PP! Go for the "I have more kids so I can't get a job" route. Very effective against insecure mothers.

PP maybe a few posters have said she should come and post here but most of us do not give a shit! SHE decieded to do a public article in the WAPO about herself and her family. Do you really think she did not suspect she owuld get mixed reviews? DCUM is a PUBLIC INTERNET FORUM of course people are going to comment on her blog. Are you her mother or something? You seem very wrapped up in defending her life and blog. If she did not want the attention and/ or feedback on her blog and lifestyle then guess what....SHE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN IN THE NEWS!!!!!!!!!!

9:04 again. Here's what you sound like: Sure, I'm going to beat up on Frugal Mama, that's my right! But HOW DARE YOU criticize ME for posting something rude on DCUM!!!!!!!! (add more exclamation points, as needed)

It's like Mean Girls.

Um please learn to read. I never said you could not criticize my posts. I dont know you and do not care who you are. Go for it!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

PP maybe a few posters have said she should come and post here but most of us do not give a shit! SHE decieded to do a public article in the WAPO about herself and her family. Do you really think she did not suspect she owuld get mixed reviews? DCUM is a PUBLIC INTERNET FORUM of course people are going to comment on her blog. Are you her mother or something? You seem very wrapped up in defending her life and blog. If she did not want the attention and/ or feedback on her blog and lifestyle then guess what....SHE SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN IN THE NEWS!!!!!!!!!!

9:04 again. Here's what you sound like: Sure, I'm going to beat up on Frugal Mama, that's my right! But HOW DARE YOU criticize ME for posting something rude on DCUM!!!!!!!! (add more exclamation points, as needed)

It's like Mean Girls.

Um please learn to read. I never said you could not criticize my posts. I dont know you and do not care who you are. Go for it!

Huh, all the hyperventilating self-justification and exclamation points certainly gave the impression you're defensive. Unless you're actually a 13-year-old girl.

[oakland]

1. The lack of basic logic skills on display in this thread is breathtaking. Words have meanings. "Frugal" has a meaning. The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as "Practicing or marked by economy, as in the expenditure of money or the use of material resources." The word "economy" is defined as "careful, thrifty management of resources, such as money, materials, or labor." So, let's recap:

Does "frugal" mean "impoverished"? NO.

Does "frugal" mean "has a household income in the bottom 50% of a given society"? NO.

Does being affluent disqualify a person from being frugal? NO.

Does "frugal" mean "never, ever buys expensive, non-essential things"? NO.

The foregoing is not a matter of opinion; it is, if words have meaning, fact.

2. I wonder if the critics of Amy Suardi consider themselves liberal (as I do, and as I think most DC residents do), because one of the bedrock principles of liberalism is that before reaching conclusions or making judgments, we should ascertain the facts. We know NOTHING about the Suardi family's past financial situation, current household income, or future prospects. To make judgments, in spite of our total ignorance of her situation, about her personal choices and whether or not they should be deemed "frugal" is illiberal in the extreme.

3. The critics have totally ignored what is obviously one of Amy's most important and explicit points: that living frugally is something ASPIRATIONAL. It's something that we aim to do but don't always succeed in doing. So she bought a $1,000 table--is anyone seriously making the argument that that single purchase disqualifies her from presenting herself as frugal? That's like saying "You can't have a blog about nutrition because you ate french fries last week." Furthermore, you can always be *more* frugal. Not being as frugal as you could be doesn't mean you're not frugal.

[Anonymous]

God, I am so stupid. I thought all the frugal mamas lived in Mt. Ranier.

[Anonymous]

oakland wrote:1. The lack of basic logic skills on display in this thread is breathtaking. Words have meanings. "Frugal" has a meaning. The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as "Practicing or marked by economy, as in the expenditure of money or the use of material resources." The word "economy" is defined as "careful, thrifty management of resources, such as money, materials, or labor." So, let's recap:

Does "frugal" mean "impoverished"? NO.

Does "frugal" mean "has a household income in the bottom 50% of a given society"? NO.

Does being affluent disqualify a person from being frugal? NO.

Does "frugal" mean "never, ever buys expensive, non-essential things"? NO.

The foregoing is not a matter of opinion; it is, if words have meaning, fact.

2. I wonder if the critics of Amy Suardi consider themselves liberal (as I do, and as I think most DC residents do), because one of the bedrock principles of liberalism is that before reaching conclusions or making judgments, we should ascertain the facts. We know NOTHING about the Suardi family's past financial situation, current household income, or future prospects. To make judgments, in spite of our total ignorance of her situation, about her personal choices and whether or not they should be deemed "frugal" is illiberal in the extreme.

3. The critics have totally ignored what is obviously one of Amy's most important and explicit points: that living frugally is something ASPIRATIONAL. It's something that we aim to do but don't always succeed in doing. So she bought a $1,000 table--is anyone seriously making the argument that that single purchase disqualifies her from presenting herself as frugal? That's like saying "You can't have a blog about nutrition because you ate french fries last week." Furthermore, you can always be *more* frugal. Not being as frugal as you could be doesn't mean you're not frugal.

You have spent too much time thinking about this.

[Anonymous]

oakland wrote:1. The lack of basic logic skills on display in this thread is breathtaking. Words have meanings. "Frugal" has a meaning. The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as "Practicing or marked by economy, as in the expenditure of money or the use of material resources." The word "economy" is defined as "careful, thrifty management of resources, such as money, materials, or labor." So, let's recap:

Does "frugal" mean "impoverished"? NO.

Does "frugal" mean "has a household income in the bottom 50% of a given society"? NO.

Does being affluent disqualify a person from being frugal? NO.

Does "frugal" mean "never, ever buys expensive, non-essential things"? NO.

The foregoing is not a matter of opinion; it is, if words have meaning, fact.

2. I wonder if the critics of Amy Suardi consider themselves liberal (as I do, and as I think most DC residents do), because one of the bedrock principles of liberalism is that before reaching conclusions or making judgments, we should ascertain the facts. We know NOTHING about the Suardi family's past financial situation, current household income, or future prospects. To make judgments, in spite of our total ignorance of her situation, about her personal choices and whether or not they should be deemed "frugal" is illiberal in the extreme.

3. The critics have totally ignored what is obviously one of Amy's most important and explicit points: that living frugally is something ASPIRATIONAL. It's something that we aim to do but don't always succeed in doing. So she bought a $1,000 table--is anyone seriously making the argument that that single purchase disqualifies her from presenting herself as frugal? That's like saying "You can't have a blog about nutrition because you ate french fries last week." Furthermore, you can always be *more* frugal. Not being as frugal as you could be doesn't mean you're not frugal.

The real question is:

Is that level of frugality newsworthy or banal?

Research, please.

[Anonymous]

Oh noooo...... Oakland, I appreciate your loyalty to your friend. But this thread had sunk to the 2nd or 3rd page of the Off-Topic Forum, which is exactly where it belongs: in oblivion, where people aren't thinking or posting any more. Now we're in for another day or two of fighting over what "frugal" means.

[Anonymous]

Hi Oakland... You must really love your daughter Amy to post such a long useless rant.

[Anonymous]

oakland wrote:1. The lack of basic logic skills on display in this thread is breathtaking. Words have meanings. "Frugal" has a meaning. The American Heritage Dictionary defines it as "Practicing or marked by economy, as in the expenditure of money or the use of material resources." The word "economy" is defined as "careful, thrifty management of resources, such as money, materials, or labor." So, let's recap:

Does "frugal" mean "impoverished"? NO.

Does "frugal" mean "has a household income in the bottom 50% of a given society"? NO.

Does being affluent disqualify a person from being frugal? NO.

Does "frugal" mean "never, ever buys expensive, non-essential things"? NO.

The foregoing is not a matter of opinion; it is, if words have meaning, fact.

2. I wonder if the critics of Amy Suardi consider themselves liberal (as I do, and as I think most DC residents do), because one of the bedrock principles of liberalism is that before reaching conclusions or making judgments, we should ascertain the facts. We know NOTHING about the Suardi family's past financial situation, current household income, or future prospects. To make judgments, in spite of our total ignorance of her situation, about her personal choices and whether or not they should be deemed "frugal" is illiberal in the extreme.

3. The critics have totally ignored what is obviously one of Amy's most important and explicit points: that living frugally is something ASPIRATIONAL. It's something that we aim to do but don't always succeed in doing. So she bought a $1,000 table--is anyone seriously making the argument that that single purchase disqualifies her from presenting herself as frugal? That's like saying "You can't have a blog about nutrition because you ate french fries last week." Furthermore, you can always be *more* frugal. Not being as frugal as you could be doesn't mean you're not frugal.

Do you have a dead horse and a stick by chance?

[Anonymous]

Hate to ressurect, but out of fairness, she responded and obviously looked at the thread.

Amy June 6, 2012 at 2:20 pm
Hi Meagan,

Frugality is a lifestyle and a way of living with lots of interpretations. To me being frugal means living simply, staying out of debt, and spending wisely, as I explain here http://www.frugal-mama.com/what-is-frugal-mama/ and in my weekly posts.

Sincerely,
Amy

Reply

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hate to ressurect, but out of fairness, she responded and obviously looked at the thread.

Amy June 6, 2012 at 2:20 pm
Hi Meagan,

Frugality is a lifestyle and a way of living with lots of interpretations. To me being frugal means living simply, staying out of debt, and spending wisely, as I explain here http://www.frugal-mama.com/what-is-frugal-mama/ and in my weekly posts.

Sincerely,
Amy

Reply

Where is this response that you are quoting? A comment on the article?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hate to ressurect, but out of fairness, she responded and obviously looked at the thread.

Amy June 6, 2012 at 2:20 pm
Hi Meagan,

Frugality is a lifestyle and a way of living with lots of interpretations. To me being frugal means living simply, staying out of debt, and spending wisely, as I explain here http://www.frugal-mama.com/what-is-frugal-mama/ and in my weekly posts.

Sincerely,
Amy

Reply

Where is this response that you are quoting? A comment on the article?

I don't buy her explanations. So she's trying to tell us that she bought her house with CASH? That they have NO debt? Yea, O.K. They have no debt and no retirement. Still doesn't sound like frugal living to me!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I haven't read her blog, but the article's description of "frugal" was laughable: public schools! cleans her own house! Dear lord, most people send their kids to public schoolas and don't have a cleaning service. That doesn't scream "frugal" to me. The again, I can't afford to SAH OR live in Tenle

I can't afford to put my kids in daycare

[Anonymous]

She will be hosting a regular segment on the Today show eventually, I am sure. She is a gorgeous doctors wife with a degree from Brown. The term frugal here is as it relates to middle class women who aspire to an upper middle class lifestyle. I am sure she is friends with someone at the Post who offered to write the piece on her behalf to help with promoting her. The consumer of morning news programs will love watching her in a J Crew twinset (ok, maybe its TSE....shhh) between segments on missing children, what bathing suits fit your body type, fun brunch recipes and a tornado that ripped through a small town in Iowa. She is living the American dream....