Ad blocker detected: Our website is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors. Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker on our website.
It probably came with pants, but since it's still like 85 in Temecula, she's trying to pretend there's cold weather for the fashion. And Instagram, duh!
And guys!!!! How come no one has mentioned the comment asking about her nasty toe? It's her gross 3 month old pedicure that she's too lazy to take off, but it looks like some disease! Girlfriend, it takes 2.5 seconds to wipe off nail polish!
chloe6124 wrote:That dress she has on Emma in her IG story looks like a shirt that needs pants. That is not a dress.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So when it's an outfit that would look cute with tights... there are no tights. Just under the onesies. Lol
The Instagram trend that Rash is poorly attempting to copy has baby girls in tights under onesies BUT with bloomers or little shorties over the top. All you need to do is go to the Jamie Kay (Rash’s favourite) Instagram and check out their tagged pics to see how other mums style it ‘properly’ (not that I personally like that trend).
chloe6124 wrote:That dress she has on Emma in her IG story looks like a shirt that needs pants. That is not a dress.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So when it's an outfit that would look cute with tights... there are no tights. Just under the onesies. Lol
The Instagram trend that Rash is poorly attempting to copy has baby girls in tights under onesies BUT with bloomers or little shorties over the top. All you need to do is go to the Jamie Kay (Rash’s favourite) Instagram and check out their tagged pics to see how other mums style it ‘properly’ (not that I personally like that trend).
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Is that really what's "in style" for little kids right now? I guess the 1930s and 40s are finally making a comeback. The more I was scrolling through that instagram, I just kept thinking if there was a black and white filter on these pictures, I'd think they came out of a textbook from the chapter on World War 2.
So Emma “rolled” over. Did anyone notice how it seemed like Rachelle was pushing down on the edge of the couch? Obviously that’s going to make her roll. Put her down on the hard floor and see if she can do it there. Let’s see how “advanced” Emma is then.
Yep. Such an idiot. Who puts their baby on the edge of a couch to roll over!? I can garantee she would not have been able to do it on the floor. And the way she was violently picking her up and putting her down over and over again even though she was clearly upset and over it. Anything for the views.
All three of my kids rolled over from front to back around a month old on the floor. It was between two and three months that they rolled from back to front.
I can't with these two clowns; I watch maybe once a month because they're too ridiculous for me to deal with any more than that. I see R & J still talk over each other constantly; that's fun to watch. They still scratch and paw at her all the time; has that baby had one peaceful nap or sleep that wasn't interrupted with "she's so cute"? Speaking of being cute, no one is going to think Bryemma's cries are cute just because you think she's cute.
I can’t stand how she’s always trying to capture things on video or in photos. I’ve noticed it a lot lately and it’s driving me crazy. Like, a lot. It’s always “Oh pleeeease do it for the camera” and she’s always telling Justin how Emma did something cute and she always adds that she got it on camera. I mean, I took lots of pictures of my kids when they were babies but Rachelle is a whooole different level. It’s so annoying.
Haulnarse wrote:So predictable. I must admit in the second photo Brynemma does look cute - wish they’d hold her better, the thumb-penis is not a great look!
baby rolls on the couch cos shes pushing down on the side of the cushion - not exactly rocket science rash! 
