This notation was penned

This notation was penned in beside the photograph:

"...Josh...oops,
I mean Brad kept trying to feed me straw. Jane's a hottie, but her
husband's a friggin' idiot. Fer chrissakes, dude, I've got a butt going
here. Is he blind? I'm trying to smoke and here he's are trying to
domesticate me. Get a clue. I'm on my break and I'm a UNION llama: I
get what I want, when I want it. That's the power of labor!"
Sigh.
So, here we have more evidence of the Llamas descension into
leftist-celebrity brownnosing hell.
They really are a pair of suckups, aren't they? I wonder if there's a
twelve-step program for this sort of thing? I'm sure there is, but I'll
admit, I'm just too lazy to go looking for it. Anyhoo, as we all know,
the first step in any recovery of this kind is admitting you have a
problem and Steve's in serious denial. And I believe an intervention is called for.

Because, you know, I really do
care.
I hate to point out the obvious, but I never actually admitted defeat.
I simply said that a llama in a waistcoat would be better at playing
Mr. Darcy than Matthew MacFadyen. Nothing more. Nothing less. Methinks
the technical term is "projecting," but I'm no shrink, so I'll leave it
up to the medical community to label him appropriately. But for me,
I'll just say this: Good Gravy, man! Realize that's Josh Lyman trying
to feed you straw? Have you no shame?

Posted by: Kathy at 11:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 259 words, total size 2 kb.

I wonder if they're going

I wonder if they're going to charge interest?

Posted by: Kathy at 11:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.

Or at least I think

Or at least I think that's how the French say it. And spell it. Erm. Anyway...

Ahem.

I just came across this and I do believe I'm going to succumb to a case of the vapors, ala Mrs. Bennet.

Kiera freakin' Knightly???????

I think not.

Jane, bring the salts!

Posted by: Kathy at 11:35 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 59 words, total size 1 kb.

Interesting article from the NY

Interesting article from the NY Times Magazine on Kerry's foreign policy.

Here are the highlights:

But when you listen carefully to what Bush and Kerry say,
it becomes clear that the differences between them are more profound
than the matter of who can be more effective in achieving the same
ends. Bush casts the war on terror as a vast struggle that is likely to
go on indefinitely, or at least as long as radical Islam commands
fealty in regions of the world. In a rare moment of either candor or
carelessness, or perhaps both, Bush told Matt Lauer on the ''Today''
show in August that he didn't think the United States could actually
triumph in the war on terror in the foreseeable future. ''I don't think
you can win it,'' he said -- a statement that he and his aides tried to
disown but that had the ring of sincerity to it. He and other members
of his administration have said that Americans should expect to be
attacked again, and that the constant shadow of danger that hangs over
major cities like New York and Washington is the cost of freedom. In
his rhetoric, Bush suggests that terrorism for this generation of
Americans is and should be an overwhelming and frightening reality.
When I asked Kerry what it would take for Americans to feel safe again,
he displayed a much less apocalyptic worldview.
''We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not
the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance,'' Kerry said. ''As a
former law-enforcement person, I know we're never going to end
prostitution. We're never going to end illegal gambling. But we're
going to reduce it, organized crime, to a level where it isn't on the
rise. It isn't threatening people's lives every day, and fundamentally,
it's something that you continue to fight, but it's not threatening the
fabric of your life.'
This analogy struck me as remarkable, if only because it seemed to
throw down a big orange marker between Kerry's philosophy and the
president's. Kerry, a former prosecutor, was suggesting that the war,
if one could call it that, was, if not winnable, then at least
controllable. If mobsters could be chased into the back rooms of seedy
clubs, then so, too, could terrorists be sent scurrying for their lives
into remote caves where they wouldn't harm us. Bush had continually
cast himself as the optimist in the race, asserting that he alone saw
the liberating potential of American might, and yet his dark vision of
unending war suddenly seemed far less hopeful than Kerry's notion that
all of this horror -- planes flying into buildings, anxiety about
suicide bombers and chemicals in the subway -- could somehow be made to
recede until it was barely in our thoughts. {...}The challenge of
beating back these nonstate actors -- not just Islamic terrorists but
all kinds of rogue forces -- is what Kerry meant by ''the dark side of
globalization.'' He came closest to articulating this as an actual
foreign-policy vision in a speech he gave at U.C.L.A. last February. ''The
war on terror is not a clash of civilizations,'' he said then. ''It is
a clash of civilization against chaos, of the best hopes of humanity
against dogmatic fears of progress and the future.'' This stands in
significant contrast to the Bush doctrine, which holds that the war on
terror, if not exactly a clash of civilizations, is nonetheless a
struggle between those states that would promote terrorism and those
that would exterminate it. Bush, like Kerry, accepts the premise that
America is endangered mainly by a new kind of adversary that claims no
state or political entity as its own. But he does not accept the idea
that those adversaries can ultimately survive and operate independently
of states; in fact, he asserts that terrorist groups are inevitably the
subsidiaries of irresponsible regimes. ''We must be prepared to stop
rogue states and their terrorist clients,'' the National Security
Strategy said, in a typical passage, ''before they are able to threaten
or use weapons of mass destruction against the United States and our
allies and friends.'' {...}By singling out three states in particular-
Iraq, North Korea and Iran -- as an ''axis of evil,'' and by invading
Iraq on the premise that it did (or at least might) sponsor terrorism,
Bush cemented the idea that his war on terror is a war against those
states that, in the president's words, are not with us but against us.
Many of Bush's advisers spent their careers steeped in cold-war
strategy, and their foreign policy is deeply rooted in the idea that
states are the only consequential actors on the world stage, and that
they can -- and should -- be forced to exercise control over the
violent groups that take root within their borders. Kerry's view, on the other hand, suggests that it is the very
premise of civilized states, rather than any one ideology, that is
under attack. And no one state, acting alone, can possibly have much
impact on the threat, because terrorists will always be able to move
around, shelter their money and connect in cyberspace; there are no
capitals for a superpower like the United States to bomb, no
ambassadors to recall, no economies to sanction. The U.S. military
searches for bin Laden, the Russians hunt for the Chechen terrorist
Shamil Basayev and the Israelis fire missiles at Hamas bomb makers; in
Kerry's world, these disparate terrorist elements make up a loosely
affiliated network of diabolical villains, more connected to one
another by tactics and ideology than they are to any one state sponsor.
The conflict, in Kerry's formulation, pits the forces of order versus
the forces of chaos, and only a unified community of nations can ensure
that order prevails. One can infer from this that if Kerry were able to speak less
guardedly, in a less treacherous atmosphere than a political campaign,
he might say, as some of his advisers do, that we are not in an actual
war on terror. Wars are fought between states or between factions vying
for control of a state; Al Qaeda and its many offspring are neither. If
Kerry's foreign-policy frame is correct, then law enforcement probably
is the most important, though not the only, strategy you can employ
against such forces, who need passports and bank accounts and weapons
in order to survive and flourish. Such a theory suggests that, in
our grief and fury, we have overrated the military threat posed by Al
Qaeda, paradoxically elevating what was essentially a criminal
enterprise, albeit a devastatingly sophisticated and global one, into
the ideological successor to Hitler and Stalin -- and thus conferring
on the jihadists a kind of stature that might actually work in their
favor, enabling them to attract more donations and more recruits.
{...}He would begin, if sworn into office, by going immediately to
the United Nations to deliver a speech recasting American foreign
policy. Whereas Bush has branded North Korea ''evil'' and refuses to
negotiate head on with its authoritarian regime, Kerry would open
bilateral talks over its burgeoning nuclear program. Similarly, he has
said he would rally other nations behind sanctions against Iran if that
country refuses to abandon its nuclear ambitions. Kerry envisions
appointing a top-level envoy to restart the Middle East peace process,
and he's intent on getting India and Pakistan to adopt key provisions
of the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. (One place where Kerry vows to
take a harder line than Bush is Pakistan, where Bush has embraced the
military ruler Pervez Musharraf, and where Kerry sees a haven for chaos
in the vast and lawless region on the border with Afghanistan.) In all
of this, Kerry intends to use as leverage America's considerable
capacity for economic aid; a Kerry adviser told me, only slightly in
jest, that Kerry's most tempting fantasy is to attend the G-8 summit.
{...}When Kerry first told me that Sept. 11 had not changed him, I was
surprised. I assumed everyone in America -- and certainly in Washington
-- had been changed by that day. I assumed he was being overly
cautious, afraid of providing his opponents with yet another cheap
opportunity to call him a flip-flopper. What I came to understand was
that, in fact, the attacks really had not changed the way Kerry viewed
or talked about terrorism -- which is exactly why he has come across,
to some voters, as less of a leader than he could be. He may well have
understood the threat from Al Qaeda long before the rest of us. And he
may well be right, despite the ridicule from Cheney and others, when he
says that a multinational, law-enforcement-like approach can be more
effective in fighting terrorists.{...}

{my emphasis)
So, according to Kerry there isn't a war on terror, per se, but rather
an overlarge, yet "myopic" response to the attacks on 9/11. Not a clash
of civilizations but rather a "clash of civilization against chaos." A
more effective way of dealing with those chaos-inducing terrorists
who'd like to kill us is by serving them with indictments, even though,
dare I say it
when Clinton did the same damn thing it didn't really serve as a
deterrent to future attacks, ya dig?
He, basically, thinks it will all just go away if a law enforcement
tack is taken. Americans will rest easy, they'll go to bed at night not
worrying about waking up to see planes slamming into tall buildings.
Because, of course, unless you have him out there chatting up world
leaders and mullahs and doing his diplomacy bit, you don't have the
"law" part of "law and order," do you? Gotta have that law. It's
crucial. Because everyone respects laws, don't they? I mean, the UN is just a friggin' palace of virtue, right? It has to be. It's the
UN after all. Al-Qaeda is just like organized crime, only with rags on
their heads rather than fedoras. There's no difference between thugs,
after all.
Christ.
You want more attacks? By all means, vote for Kerry. If he should win,
however, I don't want to hear one goddamn word out of anyone about why
did this happen? how can we prevent it from happening again? why do
they hate us so much when we took the warm-friendly-bunny approach to
foreign policy? You either get it or you don't. If you don't, and
you choose to vote for Kerry, well, you'd better keep your trap shut
the next time we're attacked. I don't want to hear your whining.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:32 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1779 words, total size 11 kb.

Devoted Cake Eater Readers I

Devoted Cake Eater Readers I present to you Tommy Lee: University of Nebraska-Lincoln...student.

LINCOLN, Neb. - Multi-tattooed rocker Tommy Lee (news), a
high school dropout, plunged into life as a University of Nebraska
student Thursday — for reality TV. Lee mingled with fellow
Cornhuskers for an NBC show in which he'll take classes in chemistry,
literature and the history of rock 'n' roll. Flanked by production
crews and cameras, Lee bought books and Nebraska apparel at the
University Bookstore while a mass of onlookers strained for a glimpse.
"It's like a big circus," student Paul Penke said. On Monday, the
Motley Crue drummer will even try out for the Nebraska marching band.
NBC spokeswoman Susan Ross said the network hopes to get six episodes
worth of footage for a series set to air next summer. Lee will have a
tutor and live off-campus.

Since the football team's not doing so hot this year (by Nebraskan
standards, anyway)I'm sure Tommy's visit to Lincoln will be the hottest
thing since they filmed Terms of Endearment there and Jack Nicholson flew in for a few hours to shoot.

He'll have to drive to Omaha to find hookers, though.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:17 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 205 words, total size 1 kb.

Man, are we living in

Man, are we living in a nanny state or what?

*what would Pele do? Methinks Pele would say whatever
the Portugese equivalent of "What the f@$k are you people thinking?"
happens to be.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 43 words, total size 1 kb.

Courtesy o' Martini Boy, The

Courtesy o' Martini Boy, The Horserace Blog has done some interesting research on
county voter registrations, and it doesn't look good for Kerry.
The thing the Strib continuously ignores in its rush to define
Minnesota in Garrison Keillor terms is the massive demographic shift
that's been going on since the mid-90's. According to the Strib,
there's still great respect for the Scandahoovian Liberal way, and of
course we'll all respect that great liberal tradition and vote
accordingly. Despite the fact we have a very
conservative Republican governor. Despite the fact that the majority of
our House representation is Republican. Despite the fact that Normy-Boy
Coleman bitchslapped Walter Mondale (the Walter Mondale. Former
VP. You know who I'm talking about) to become Senator after Wellstone
died. Wellstone's memorial service did the DFL no favors in that
election, either. The facts are there for anyone who cares to look. The
place is going conservative. It's happening and has been happening. Are
my findings of a scientific nature? Nope. They're strictly the product
of my observations. Look at the most recent poll conducted
by that pillar of journalism, The Star Tribune. If Minnesota is really
as liberal as the Strib and everyone else would have us believe, well,
why is Bush within seven points? I think it's an exceedingly fair
question, given what the nation believes about Minnesota's political
views and given the last two elections, where Republicans have
succeeded over DFL guys they wouldn't have beaten ten years before. To
be fair, the Strib has admitted that Minnesota is in play, but
still...the editorial endorsements will, generally speaking, be DFL
across the board, and I guaran-frickin'-tee you that in at least one
endorsement, probably the one for Kerry, they will blather on about the
great Scandahoovian liberal tradition that is Minnesota's and will
suggest that people vote according to that tradtion, because it's our own.
Maybe twenty years ago it was our own. Not anymore. While I'm not
discounting the fact that redistricting has been kind to Republicans,
seats were shifting right before the Legislature got its hands on the
census reports. Jesse Ventura, while still to the left of Norm Coleman,
nonetheless beat out the uberliberal Skip Humphrey (yeah, he's Hubert's
kid)for governor in 1998. To my mind, Mark Dayton's election to the
senate in 2000 is an abberation because he outspent Rod Grams by
millions of dollars. And I mean millions of dollars. You couldn't turn
the damn TV on without seeing an ad for Mark Dayton. It was disgusting.
Moving along, if Wellstone had lived, my gut feeling is that he would
have been reelected, but by a very small margin that would have been
chalked up to the incumbent factor and not because he convinced anyone
that he was the best man for the job. Normy Boy's a popular creature
here in the Cities, and he ran a great campaign in 2002. But what's
more is that, even though he's a Republican, he genuinely appeals to
conservative Democrats. After all, he used to be one. What's surprising
about his success, though, is that he never suffered for his
switcheroo. Everyone kept bleating on about how he would pay and he
never did. If Jesse hadn't appealed to so many 18-24 year-olds, well,
it's very possible he would have been governor. Norm came in second in
that very close race. But, like I said, none of this really means
anything because they're just my observations, but still...the
evidence, once you look at it rationally, adds up. It's tight now, and
it's going to get tighter. I'm going to be the only person in the state
of Minnesota who's not
surprised if Bush takes it. I genuinely think it could happen. If it
does happen, it will be by a few thousand votes and not a few hundred.
Such a defeat will leave a mark on the DFL'ers and will force people to realize that---duh---Minnesota's going conservative.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:01 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 667 words, total size 4 kb.

In a piece he wrote

In a piece he wrote for the Weekly Standard Jonathan Last is nicer to George Lucas than I have been.

A small sampling:

These changes, counterproductive as they are, should be
endurable. After all, George Lucas created these movies. He has the
right to wreck them if he wants. But Lucas isn't just putting out
newer, flawed versions. He is embarked on a campaign to create The One
True Version of the Star Wars mythology. You see, every time Lucas
tinkers with one of his movies, the changes becomes the official
version. The older versions are then quietly and efficiently erased
from the public record.
If you want to see the Star Wars movies as they once were, tough luck.
You'll need to go to eBay or the black market and pay hundreds of
dollars for the 1993 laserdisc set, or find a bootlegged DVD of the
same. The early, unscarred VHS editions are all aging and deteriorating
and besides which, were mostly in pan-and-scan full screen.
In a few years the original versions of the Star Wars trilogy will be
vanished completely. Many filmmakers put out director's cuts of their
movies, which are sold alongside the theatrical versions. George Lucas,
on the other hand, is so obsessed with airbrushing history that at the
end of the day, only Jar-Jar Binks will be left seated on the couch
with Lenin.

Ah, well. Jonathan's a pro and Lucas likes to sue. I can't blame him
for watching his words, which, by far, is the most eloquent sum-up on
the subject that I've read. Go read the whole thing.
But, hey, if you want to read a few posts about George that aren't
nearly so well-written, but are more vents to get that nasty, icky bile
out, you can go here, here, here and here.

And yes, I still think what he's done to Sebastian Shaw is particularly despicable.

Posted by: Kathy at 10:47 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 327 words, total size 2 kb.

If you're going to commit

If you're going to commit an armed robbery,
it might behoove you to have arms that work, eh?

Posted by: Kathy at 10:21 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.

Holy Crap, that must have

Holy Crap, that must have been one noisy, bothersome chicken.
I don't think the dog earned any "man's best friend" points here,
either.

Posted by: Kathy at 10:06 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

Cheney took Edwards over his

Cheney took Edwards over his knee and spanked him.

Try and get that
image out of your head, why don't ya? Anyway, I could go through the
minutiae and detail out how and why he was spanked, but the ultimate
conclusion would be the same. So, honestly, why should I bother?

Posted by: Kathy at 10:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.

Yep. The BOOBIETHON'S still going

Yep.
The BOOBIETHON'S still going
on.
Get over there and DONATE, damnit! There's something for everyone.
And they also need *more* pictures from bloggers to be submitted. So,
if you're a blogger and haven't been involved to this point,now is the
time to bear your mammaries! Honestly. If I can get over myself to do
it, you can, too!

Posted by: Kathy at 06:10 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

If for no other reason

If for no other reason than Michele is whipping the big guns out. She appears to be worried.

Hmmmmmm.

{Insert conversation overheard at the DIA smoking lounge yesterday}

First Guy: Yeah, there's nobody better than the Yankees. They'll win...eventually.

Second Guy: Yeah, they're just tired. Nobody's better than them. They'll pull it together. Like they did in '78. When that one guy hit it over the Green Monster. God, what was his name?

{Time passes. Brain fart ensues}

Kathy (who can't take their ignorance any longer): Bucky Dent?

Second Guy: Yeah, Bucky Dent! That's him! Thanks!

First Guy: Never heard of him.

Posted by: Kathy at 04:36 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 112 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, maybe not. Particularly if

Well, maybe not.

Particularly if there's the potential for a gun shot wound.

Posted by: Kathy at 03:19 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 23 words, total size 1 kb.

Hmmmmm. So, Robbo denies cuddling

Hmmmmm.

So, Robbo denies cuddling up to Susan Sarandon. Typical. He calls it "slanderous." Well, no, Robbo, actually it's libelous, because I didn't say it, but rather published
it, but we won't quibble about the semantics. And that's only dependent
upon if it's actually a lie. (And he claims to be a lawyer!) Then he
threatens retaliations.
Well, Steve-o, on the other hand, reacted quite differently.
One can only assume this is because he's a tenured political science
professor and feels safe admitting he's actually a liberal. He shot
down the claim of libel quite quickly and decided to take a tack
reminiscent of a certain New Jersey Democratic Governor: he not only
admits that they posed with Susan "Everyone Should Drive a Hybrid, The
Death Penalty is Wrong Because I Played a Nun in a Movie That Won Me an
Oscar So That Opinion Must be Right" Sarandon, but submits that Heifer
International's catalog used the wrong photograph. One can only
assume that he means they airbrushed off some extra llama ass fat or
something like that. Until one actually reads what he has to say.

Yeah, yeah, yeah---like you'd turn down having Susan
Sarandon put you on a leash?(I'm talking to Macktastic Rusty Wicked and
INDCent Bill, folks!) Come on, that's one hell of a fluffy sweater---of
course I'm not going to ask what type of wool that is. As to Patricia
Heaton, we the LLamabutchers would not only allow ourselves to be
leashed, but I'd even let her pose with a croquet mallet.

Then he goes on the attack with a claim about who's holding out on whom. (And yes it's whom)

I submit for your persual:




Gack. Like I'd ever let Michael Moore take part of my caloric, chocolately goodness. Pffft. As if.
Yet, just to remind you to consider the source of this libelous attack,
I went snooping through the Llamas private scrapbook and lookie what I
found:



Just so you know, it's not just the hotties they're snuggling up to. One of them even let Ed Asner
hold their leash.
Consider the source, people.

Posted by: Kathy at 03:00 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 3 kb.

Kids, I have rough news.

Kids, I have rough news. Brace yourselves.

Ya ready? Firmly trussed, are you?

Ok.

You're being dumped.

By me.

In favor of the manuscript. Which, as of about one-thirty this morning, is finally
going like gangbusters.
That's right. I'm dumping you to write fiction. It'll be temporary,
probably just for the next few days or so, but I'm on a hot-hot-hot!
streak right now and there's absolutely no way that I'm jumping off the
storyline freight train that's speeding through my brain just so I can
blog.
Ain't gonna happen.
It is bad timing, I know. Just as I've made some readership gains. But
the manuscript must come first. Sorry, folks. I do love you, but---and
I hate to point this out to you---you have plenty of other reading
options available. Go hit the links on the left hand side and all of
those wonderful folks should keep you busy until I get back.
Now back to the wilds of southern Sudan and illegal arms deals, debt
reduction in preparation for an IPO, Madrid and its kilometer zero,
and, of course, ransom demands!
Ciao for now.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:48 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 196 words, total size 1 kb.

This is what qualifies as

This is what qualifies as torture nowadays:

In the letter dated July 12 of this year, Begg protested
his innocence of any crime and demanded to know the reason for his
detention in Bagram, Afghanistan for a year.
He said he was denied natural light and fresh food, had been held in
solitary confinement, and was forced to sign and initial documents
presented to him by U.S. officials.

But wait it gets better.

He also said he was physically abused, stripped and paraded
in front of cameras held by U.S. personnel.
"During several interviews, particularly though unexclusively in
Afghanistan, I was subjected to pernicious threats of torture, actual
vindictive torture and death threats, amongst other coercively employed
interrogation techniques," he said in an extract of the letter read by
BBC radio.

Hmmm. Sound familar? Abu Ghraib anyone?
Yet, surprisingly, nowhere in any of his complaints about his treatment
at Guantanamo and Bagram, does he whine about being forced to sit on
the floor, blindfolded, restrained, and gagged, while one of his
captors read an interminably long manifesto before they whipped out a
knife and beheaded him.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:47 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 196 words, total size 1 kb.

Rather puts the Jane Austen

Rather puts the Jane Austen Cage Match to shame, eh?

Quite.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:43 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 21 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, let me take that

Well, let me take that back.

This shouldn't be cool because there's the chance of loss of life and property damage.

SEATTLE (Reuters) - New tremors detected overnight at Mount
St. Helens increased the likelihood that the Washington state volcano
would erupt again, scientists tracking renewed earthquake activity at
the mountain said on Sunday. Willie Scott, a U.S. Geological Survey
geologist, said that tremors were detected in the crater of Mount St.
Helens at 3 a.m. (1000 GMT) that indicated that a second eruption could
be in store after Friday's minor explosion that sent up a plume of
steam and ash. The U.S. Geological Survey kept its warning level at a
Level 3-Volcano Alert and kept off-limits a visitor center at the
Johnston Ridge Observatory about five miles from the volcano's crater
as a safety precaution. Gases were also detected for the second day,
Scott said, suggesting that magma may be building up underneath the
crater's lava dome created after a 1980 eruption which killed 57
people, destroyed more than 200 homes, devastated hundreds of square
miles, and sent ash drifting across North America as far east as
Oklahoma. Scientists do not expect any eruption to cause damage to
surrounding areas on the same scale. A Level 3 warning means that there
is a potential hazard to life and property in the area, the Geological
Survey said.

But it is cool.
Concerns and qualifications notwithstanding.
When Mount St. Helens blew in May of 1980, I was just finishing up
third grade and I was concerned with other things. I was still reliving
the glory of being chosen to crown a statue of the Virgin Mary on May
Day at an all school assembly. My brother, David, was graduating high
school. If I'm remembering correctly, I think my other brother, Tim,
along with my sister Susie, following the example of most college
students, were moving to a new apartment in Lincoln and we had to help
them cart their shit from one squalid apartment in Nebraska's capitol
city to another. That happened a lot
so I could easily be confusing things, but I'm pretty sure we were
dragged down to Lincoln that spring when UNL let out to help move
boxes. I am sure, however, that school was to get out that week and
summer vacation was about to begin. (Catholic schools in Omaha still
get out weeks ahead of the public schools. The nuns set that precedent:
they'd had it with us by that point in time and the lay teachers saw no
reason to abandon that particular philosophy. They still get out weeks earlier than the public schools.)

Anyway, I think you get the point. Stuff was happening
in my busy nine-year-old life and all of the Mount St. Helens activity
was background noise. Hence, I missed it when she blew her top.
Yes, we talked about it in science class, but with it being the end of
the school year, it wasn't an in-depth discussion. This being the day
and age before VCRs in the classroom (hell, we didn't even have
televisions)it didn't have the chance to sear itself into our brains
via repition. Of course I saw the National Geographic
when it came out, but that was months later. As a result, though, I've
always felt somewhat cheated. I never saw it when it happened. I missed
the big show. So, while it's not really a great thing that she's going
to blow again,
I'm feeling as though I've got a second chance to make sure I don't
miss it this time around. Friday's eruption, while thrilling, was kind
of a letdown. I wanted a little more. Not much, mind you, just a little
more. A bigger plume of ash would have satisfied. A completely darkened
sky. I wanted what happened in 1980. I wanted what I missed the first
time round. While I'm wracked with guilt over this, because I know it's a bad thing to want more, I still do want more. And it looks as if the mountain is going to oblige me.

"Cool", says she, whilst feeling like a criminal in the meantime.

Posted by: Kathy at 02:37 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 700 words, total size 4 kb.

After spending the morning driving

After spending the morning driving the husband to hell and back
(obligatory moment of frustration:
@#@W$#$%#@#getyourgoddamnlicenseback!@#@#W#%$@#! what? do I look like a
goddamn chauffer? ok, that's over with. note of apology to the husband:
sorry darlin'...just couldn't quite help myself.) I'm way behind on
what I need to do to get us out of the house by five a.m. tomorrow
morning.
The laundry needs to be finished. The house is halfway clean and the
other half is awaiting me. Then there are all the assorted joys
associated with packing to contend with. So, as you might have already
guessed, you people are taking a back seat to everything else.
I don't know what to tell everyone about live blogging from Tempe.
Should have more of an idea of that tomorrow. Blogging will continue
while we're in Phoenix---wee bastard is coming with---but I don't know
what to tell ya'll about what to expect other than that. Oh, and one
more thing: GO RED SOX!

Posted by: Kathy at 02:37 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 173 words, total size 1 kb.