Fausta does it once again by attending a lecture given by Elie Weisel and reporting on it.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:16 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 35 words, total size 1 kb.

and Leonardo DaVinci had some insiders knowledge as to what Mary Magdalene actually looked like, then I think we can safely declare Jesus Christ to have been a breast man.

Posted by: Kathy at 10:05 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 46 words, total size 1 kb.

Steve's here.

In the Twin Cities. At the Cake Eater Pad. They cancelled his flight to Billings last night, all the hotels were sold out and he crashed over here.

I'll be expecting the phone to ring shortly.

You see, I really can make a post out of just about anything. All I need is the inspriation to do so.

UPDATE: And now he's gone!

Posted by: Kathy at 08:38 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 69 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm the culprit. Or at least my author is...or might be since we're so very concerned about slandering dead authors.

{HT: Steeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeve-o}

Posted by: Kathy at 08:28 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 28 words, total size 1 kb.

Well, my devoted Cake Eater Readers, I know you've been waiting for this very exciting news, so I shall finally disclose it.

Ahem.

The Divas Are Back

Yes, that's right, kids. The delightful demystifying divas, fresh from our two month hiatus tour of Europe, Scandinavia and the Subcontinent, will be returning to answer all the very important questions regarding men and women on Thursday, September 29th.

Since Madame Chrissy has departed the blogging world, we were forced to find someone to fill Chrissy's shoes. Phoenix of Villains Vanquished has graciously agreed to slip her feet into Chrissy's Manolos and will be joining Sadie, Silk and myself every Thursday. As usual The Marvy Men's Club, comprised of The Wiz, Stigmata, Phin and The Naked Villains will be providing the male point of view.

Mark your calendars.

Posted by: Kathy at 03:26 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 143 words, total size 1 kb.

...by linking to a Washington Times article, but because it's written by Susette Kelo and is sane, I don't feel that dirty.

{...}As I sat there in the U.S. Supreme Court back in February and listened to the justices hear my case, I was so disappointed their very first question and first concern was for the power of government rather than the rights of citizens.

In many ways, my neighbors and I are the victims of legislators, lawyers and judges who believe it is somehow a sign of intelligence to make language that clearly means one thing mean something exactly the opposite: "Public use" now means private use; judges don't judge but instead let legislators decide whether they're violating the Constitution. There is nothing intelligent about misusing language in this way to take away people's homes and their rights.

What is happening to me should not happen to anyone else. Congress and state legislatures need to send a message to local governments that this kind of abuse of power not only won't be funded, it won't be tolerated.

Special interests -- developers and governments that benefit from this use of power --are working to convince the public there is no problem, but I am living proof there is. {...}

Go read the whole thing.

{Hat tip: Fausta}

Posted by: Kathy at 09:41 AM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 1 kb.

Just you wait until the Maximum Leader gets done.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:34 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 25 words, total size 1 kb.

The season premiere of Nip/Tuck is on F/X tonight.

I love this show. It's so twisted and---what's the word I'm looking for here?---perverted. It's like watching a car wreck where the reason for the wreck is that people are getting it on in the car and aren't paying attention to their driving. It's just fun. If you haven't seen it, or have avoided it, you don't know what you're missing.

I also watch it because Kelly Carlson, who plays Kimber, was one of my regulars at the Bou, way back in the day, and I like to support her efforts because she's a good person. And I really mean that: she's a good person in real life. Not only did she give me a birthday card one year (would you do that for your barista?) and brought pictures in to share with me from when she snuck a camera into the Grammys (she knew one of the Barenakedladies and was his date that year), she got down on her hands and knees to help me once. One of the facets on my wedding ring came loose because I'd banged it on something and, as a result, one of the diamonds fell out. She was there at the time I noticed it and came around the corner, gave me a hug and told me to stop crying, and then she helped me look for it. She's a good person. She deserves success not just because she's willing to play Kimber.

And, of course, because I know some of you are a curious lot, yes, she is gorgeous in real life. Every single teenage boy I had working at the store was head over heels in love with her and, quite literally, fought with each other to wait on her. Kelly was embarrassed. I thought it was funny and teased her about it. She's come a long way from working at the MAC counter at the Southdale Daytons. Here's hoping she goes even further.

Posted by: Kathy at 06:13 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 348 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I've never seen it. When it first started, we didn't get the channel it was on. We do now. Is it something I'm going to get if I come into it two? seasons late? Is it gory? For some reason I am under that impression. Ithy no like gore!

Posted by: Ith at September 20, 2005 06:50 PM (LCvAk)

2 I haven't seen it I may have to check it out. As a side note, I though you'd type Kelly Clarkson and well lets just say I was a tad bit shocked and appalled to say the least.

Posted by: phin at September 20, 2005 09:19 PM (DGPlf)

3 This show is a total guilty pleasure. And I have to say, this episode is hard to watch.

Posted by: Slublog at September 20, 2005 09:57 PM (Krjc2)

4 I have a secret crush on Christian. He's SO F'N BAAAAD. And there's almost nil in the way of "redeeming qualities." Heh. Plus, I will always and forever love me some Liz (Roma). She rawks.

Posted by: Margi at September 23, 2005 09:37 AM (nwEQH)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

That Esther was such a bitch?

Posted by: Kathy at 04:59 PM | Comments (1) | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

I often joked that when it comes to tithing, the Catholic Church is no different than the mafia: they want their percentage off the top and they want it now. And that's about the extent of my joking capabilities when it comes to the finances of the Catholic Church. Because you have to have knowledge to make a joke about something. An uninformed joke isn't funny. A Catholic might know about what's being done in their parish, but when the money starts going up the ladder, well, you just don't have a clue as to where it goes or how it's spent. Nor is it supposed to be any of your business.

So it was with great curiosity that I read this article in Forbes, (Registration required) because not only does it get down to the nitty gritty of the money matters, it also highlights how this is yet another extension of the heterodoxy v. orthodoxy battle that is taking place within the Church currently.

{...}What would a turnaround artist do with an $8.6 billion (sales) organization with 133,000 employees, falling market share and a mountain of multimillion-dollar lawsuits?

You can't break it up into pieces or sell off the whole shebang. This, after all, is the American Roman Catholic Church. But Geoffrey T. Boisi, a veteran Wall Streeter and devout Catholic, has an answer: Rationalize the assets and look for a better return, just as you would in any business. First, says Boisi, 58, "we're recommending a rigorous analysis of how all parishes and dioceses in this country are being managed. The laity is now offering up its expertise to help the Church through a very difficult time." But ultimately, he concedes, "we have to face the realities that some parishes will have to go. Some schools will need to be shut down. There is no other way."

A pitched battle is shaping up between reformers and traditionalists within the U.S. Catholic Church. On the one side are businesspeople like Boisi and former baseball commissioner Fay Vincent. They have few if any disagreements with the Pope on matters of dogma. But they are openly defiant of the Church authorities on matters of money. The rebels argue that better financial management by an informed laity is the only way to reinvigorate the fallen-away faithful. "How could anyone in Rome argue it wouldn't be better if the Church were run more efficiently?" asks Vincent.

On the other side of the aisle are powerful organizations like Opus Dei, which has a direct line to the Vatican, and large donors like Domino's Pizza founder Thomas Monaghan. They see any change as a direct threat to the long-established order of things. "You don't need modern management techniques," says William Donohue, president of the Catholic League. "You need a return to orthodoxy." This is a struggle over authority and money--and the outcome will change forever the lives of the 65 million Catholics in the U.S.

No one denies the American Church is in trouble. Over the past four decades regular attendance at Mass has collapsed from 75% of those who professed to be Catholic to 40% today. Nearly one in five churches doesn't have a resident priest. In those that do, parishioners are increasingly likely to hear Mass said in thickly accented English by a prelate from Nigeria or the Philippines. Many parishioners are still furious about the sex-abuse scandals--as well as the coverups and sizable payouts that followed--comparing their impact to the shock of Sept. 11. "Once that blew up, Catholics realized just how little say they had in their churches, and they were incensed about it," says Robert Beloin, the Catholic chaplain of Yale University.{...}

Forget about the laity having any say about Church teachings, certain orthodox Catholics wouldn't want the laity to help with the money problems, even when it's apparent that the Church could use some financial guidance because they've got income troubles, big time.

They have expressed their rage with their pocketbooks. On a household basis, Catholics, who are now just as well-educated and upwardly mobile as Protestants, donate less than half as much to their parishes: $550 a year, compared with $1,300 for the typical Protestant. Since the pedophilia cases broke in 2002, annual giving at the parish level has inched up an average 4.6% a year to an estimated $6 billion. But bishops have been hit much harder. In Boston, giving to the archdiocese dropped 43% from $14 million in 2002 to $8 million in 2003. The Spokane, Wash. archdiocese, saddled with a reported $77 million in sex-abuse settlement claims, saw donations to its annual appeal plunge from $1.9 million in 2002 to $45,000 a year later. In the Diocese of Rockville Centre, N.Y., the bishop's take fell 28% to $7.3 million after a 2003 grand jury report found the diocese protected abusive priests by shuffling them from parish to parish. {...}

So, one would think that the fact a bunch of Catholic big wigs who know how to run businesses want to help the Church with this problem would be a Godsend, right? Nope.

{...}He has drawn an impressive following. Among his acolytes: William P. Frank, senior partner at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Frederick Gluck, former managing director of McKinsey & Co.; Thomas J. Healey, onetime partner at Goldman Sachs and Assistant Treasury Secretary in the Reagan Administration; Jonathan O'Herron, partner at Lazard Frères; Gerard Roche, chairman of Heidrick & Struggles International; and Richard Syron, chief executive of Freddie Mac.

What do these guys want? A reorganization of how the American Church is run, from requiring annual reports and five-year strategic plans in each parish to SWAT teams of lay accountants, lawyers, psychologists and consultants to deal with crises and other management problems. Among the goals:

• Establish better recruitment and training of the nation's 31,000 lay ministers--80% of whom are women--as well as annual performance reviews.
• Encourage more lay involvement in parish finance committees, whose decisions would carry weight with priests and bishops.
• Streamline dioceses, which control parishes, even if it means closing redundant churches, seminaries and schools.
• Cut costs by, for example, buying Bibles, paper towels, candles and clerical garments in bulk.
• Introduce "best-practices" programs, like those of the Chicago archdiocese, to achieve accountability in the other dioceses.

There's really nothing revolutionary there. All these guys are saying is that there is benefit to running the Church like a business. You have a lot of money coming in, and even more of that money in some dioceses is going out---the books are unbalanced and here are some ways you could straighten this problem out. But just the fact these guys are speaking up, well, that's troublesome for some of the more orthodox members of the Church. These men have been labeled as "liberals and dissenters." They're actually anything but, but you'd never know that to listen to the orthodox members whine:

{...}For an organization as hierarchical as the Church, run by a man who is (according to doctrine since 1870) infallible, the talk about "customers" borders on heresy. "The Church is not a business, and Catholics in the pews shouldn't be considered customers," insists Denis Coleman, onetime chairman of Covenant House and a former director at Bear Stearns. He says he's not against transparency. But, "if you follow Boisi's logic, then Catholics ultimately can choose who becomes a cardinal--or even the Pope." Other powerful conservative Catholics are lining up on Coleman's side. Among them is Father C. John McCloskey, a former stockbroker for Merrill Lynch who is a leading cleric in Opus Dei, and Bishop Fabian W. Bruskewitz of Lincoln, Neb. The call for reform, they fear, is really a Trojan horse to subvert the authority of the Church. "If Boisi and his group are anything like Voice of the Faithful,"says a prominent member of Opus Dei, referring to a group calling for more financial disclosure and lay involvement in running the Church, "that would be a sign of their intent for a putsch, a takeover." Voice of the Faithful, whose motto is "Keep the faith, change the Church," denies that characterization.{...}

Now, I put that quote in bold print for a reason. The "prominent member of Opus Dei" used the word "If". As in "If Boisi and his group are anything like..." then this "prominent member" goes on to compare this group to another "liberal" group, well of course they're intent on a "putsch." (Which is a nice word choice, eh? I think we've all heard that one before and it's generally a term associated with Adolf Hitler.) But that "If" is very curious, isn't it? If these guys are anything like this group, well, of course they're intent on taking over. Like, duh. Yet the use of the word "if" signals that this prominent member doesn't know that they're like the Voice of the Faithful. The "prominent member" is just assuming they are because they're not toeing the orthodoxy line.

Do you think that if I said to a member of Opus Dei, "Well, geez. From what I've heard you guys sacrifice goats under the full moon. So you should be locked up because you're a bunch of nuts!" they wouldn't have a problem with that? That they wouldn't call me "uninformed" and "uneducated" about what their mission and their practices are? Of course they would. And they'd have every right to do so. But apparently prominent members of Opus Dei are willing to vilify those who would disagree with them simply by comparing them to their enemies. Which is baloney. I'm sure your mother told you that to "assume" is to make an "ass" out of "u" and "me." I know mine did. It doesn't seem as if that message filters down from the Opus Dei moms, though, does it?

There is so little faith going on in this organization designed to promote faith it's just baffling.

Posted by: Kathy at 01:42 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1660 words, total size 10 kb.

Preggers. With pictures!

They're registered, too. You can find it here.

And don't give me any guff about posting the link to the registry, either.

You looked at the kid's ultrasound. You made that "awwwwwww" noise and went all gooey. You are now obliged to go and buy the kid stuff.

Now, shoo.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:34 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.

1 [heart] You are the best!

Posted by: Stigmata at September 20, 2005 11:55 AM (ddzYA)

2 I swear, their due date is almost exactly the same as mine. Too cool. Looooovvveeeeed the sonogram pictures. Those are the best! And, just as soon as I can afford my own layette, I'll get busy with theirs! (Hey! It's just like I'm having my first child allllll over again. Heh.)

Posted by: Margi at September 20, 2005 01:05 PM (nwEQH)

3 Congrats!

Posted by: Night Writer at September 22, 2005 07:59 PM (yZXR2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

It's Cotillion Tuesday, so swing your way over to these fine sites for the female perspective.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:04 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 33 words, total size 1 kb.

Just in case you were wondering, the shipment of patches I was expecting did show up in the mail on Saturday.

I would just like to tell the people at Quit Plan that they should be glad the postal service saved their collective fat ass on this one. If they hadn't arrived, I would have hounded them to death with phone calls. Oh sure, they're all about taking calls and being cheery and supportive, but I'm pretty damn sure they wouldn't have wanted to listen to me open up a can of bitchcraft. I'm sure it's not a surprise for everyone to learn that I am quite handy with a can opener when it comes to getting the can of bitchcraft open. I don't mean to brag or anything, but I've got it down to 2.5 seconds or less in some instances.

I'm sure they're happy that the US Postal Service spared them.

Posted by: Kathy at 01:57 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 167 words, total size 1 kb.

...could, conceivably, get you into trouble.

{...}Sounds from typing on computer keyboards are distinctive enough to be decoded, allowing security breaches caused by "acoustic snooping," University of California, Berkeley researchers said on Wednesday.

The researchers said they were able to feed sound recordings of typing on keyboards into a computer and use an algorithm to recover up to 96 percent of the keyboard characters entered by typists.

"It's a form of acoustical spying that should raise red flags among computer security and privacy experts," said Doug Tygar, a Berkeley professor of computer science and information management.

"If we were able to figure this out, it's likely that people with less honorable intentions can -- or have -- as well," Tygar said.{...}

96% of recovered keystrokes isn't all that impressive, however, when you take into account the odds of recovering the missing four percent. After all, you need a password in its entirety---96% of it isn't going to magically open anything. While I will admit it's easier for a hacker to brute force the remaining keystrokes, you'd still have to know precisely what you were doing to get anything.

No, I'm not worried about this. I think this is a much more dazzling weakness as far as computer security is concerned.

{HT: Jonathan}

Posted by: Kathy at 10:12 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 2 kb.

Oh, yes, thank God for the mainstream media!

/sarcasm

Posted by: Kathy at 04:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 27 words, total size 1 kb.

Smallholder v. Phoenix.

I've been on the fringes of agriculture all my life, living where I do. I can see both sides of this story, so I don't know who wins this argument. I'm loathe to subsidize Archer-Daniels-Midland and Monsanto, and on the whole I don't think subsidies help anyone in the long run, but I can see where Phoenix does have a point.

Posted by: Kathy at 01:51 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 70 words, total size 1 kb.

Via Dearest Jonathan we have this post from The American Scene the CDC's sexual behavior data. The relevant bit:

{...}But it's a significant phenomenon nonetheless - and if you broke it out by age and class, I'm sure that bisexuality would be even more common (and increasingly so) among upper-middle-class young people. If the experience of human history shows anything, it's that a large percentage of any given population will experiment with opportunistic homosexuality if the taboos against it are lifted - and at least in our country's more exclusive circles, the lesbian-experimentation taboo is dead and the gay-experimentation taboo is weakening. Ancient Greece, here we come . . .{...}

To which Jonathan adds:

I don't have anything to add to serious discussions about human sexuality, although comments like this one make me wonder if the trend is liberation, or just another instance of women going out of their way to attract male attention by any means:

Ashley, 20, a student at Northern Arizona University, agrees. "It's become this totally hot thing," she says. "And the reason why is that it promises this sexual experimentation to guys. They think, 'She'll kiss another girl; she's gotta be pretty wild.'"

Ashley hasn't made out with that many girls: "I've only done it like a dozen times." It's been fun, she says, but mostly because of the titillation: "There's people watching it, and that makes me feel good. The first time I did it at a party, I thought, 'So this is what it takes to get the guys' attention.'"

You decide if this is benign or a case of women desperate for male affection. (You know you're old when you read Ashley's quote and instead of thinking, Hot!, you worry that she didn't have a capable, present father while she was growing up and hope that she'll spend some time working on her sense of self-confidence and self-worth.)

In any case, what interests me most is the proximate causes of what destroyed the "taboo" against LUGiness in the first place.{...}

{Ed. LUG=Lesbian until graduation. Amazingly enough during college I lived in an all-girls dorm and a sorority and I never saw anyone getting it on with their best friend or their roommate. It never happened. Really and truly. And if something like that WAS going on, believe you me, everyone would have known about it because a. girls are catty creatures and b. close quarters means gossip spreads like wildfire. So, I will admit I believe this whole LUG thing is an urban myth perpetrated by pr0n writers and men who really would like to think that living in a sorority house is all pillow fights and sapphic experimentation.}

Jonathan ultimately places the blame on Friends with Monica and Rachel making out in front of Chandler and Joey to get their apartment back. I think Jonathan's partially correct: Friends showed two women making out. What he misses, however, is that these two female characters were making out not because they were hot for one another but because they were trying to get what they wanted (their apartment) from men. That's when the taboo died: when it became cool to use said bisexuality to lure men into handing over what women wanted. Female bisexuality became a tool to manipulate men. Everyone knows that hetero men adore it when women get busy with one another. There's nothing new in that bit of information. What is interesting in all of this, however, is the lengths women feel they need to go to to get what they want. If making out with a woman will get them something, well, they'll do that.

The thing I find curious about the CDC's results is that, apparently, they did not take into account "The Threesome Factor" when asking women about their relations with other women. They did not ask how that coupling came about or if it took place with another partner present---in this example, a man who'd actually worked up the nerve and asked, "Would you consider being with another woman for me?" I'd be curious to know if this overall trend toward female bisexuality is the result of women actually wanting to love women or if it's just women trying to please their men.

I'd wager it's the latter.

Posted by: Kathy at 01:32 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 722 words, total size 4 kb.

1 I've had a few younger friends who were LUGs. Though in one case it was "lesbian till she met a guy and got married" .

Posted by: Ith at September 16, 2005 02:09 PM (LCvAk)

2 Enjoy the search engine traffic this post's title will bring your way. I have a feeling they may be a wee bit let down, no offense to your post.

Posted by: Doug at September 16, 2005 07:46 PM (7P5xE)

3 yeah, I chummed the google waters real good with this post

Posted by: Kathy at September 16, 2005 11:24 PM (yBAYg)

4 Wow. Way to puncture all my preconceptions, Kathy. Next you're going to tell me that the Easter Bunny isn't really laying eggs all over my yard the day after Good Friday. I'm going to use my faith & just assume that YOUR sorority was just an abberation in the "experimentation & pillow fight" department.

Posted by: Russ from Winterset at September 18, 2005 12:43 AM (6krEN)

5 I'd wager it's the latter. I'll wager that it's a little bit of both. Or so I've heard.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 19, 2005 08:21 PM (GLJdf)

6 And here is a little science to back up my assertion: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/06/030613075252.htm Women are more naturally bisexual than men. PS - I have it on good authority that the sorority hook-ups, pillow fights, etc are all true.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 19, 2005 08:25 PM (GLJdf)

7 I take your point, Bill, but just because someone likey the pictures, doesn't mean they're going to run right out and have sex with another chick, ya dig? Until someone measures the threesome factor, I will consider the information lacking.

Posted by: Kathy at September 20, 2005 12:16 AM (yBAYg)

8 I take your point, Bill, but just because someone likey the pictures, doesn't mean they're going to run right out and have sex with another chick, ya dig? Certainly. But it would also support the idea that women are more predisposed to the idea than men are to men, and in a reasonable number of cases not just doing it as a form of male manipulation. (though I don't disagree that manipulation/attention-seeking is prevalent - and to no small extent, eye-rollingly annoying) Until someone measures the threesome factor, I will consider the information lacking. I've heard a reasonable number of stories from college of women coupling with women when nary a man was in sight (no, not in Penthouse Forum). As it is, I will endeavor to conduct further primary research into this weighty matter, so that I might proffer a more informed, experiential and scientific opinion. This will of course require watching hours and hours of anthropolgical footage before venturing out into the field.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 20, 2005 08:44 AM (yZMsp)

9 PS - It's also pretty apparent that this entire post is just a wild, diversionary overcompensation for the lustfully secret sapphic crush that you have on Rosie O'Donnell.

Posted by: Bill from INDC at September 20, 2005 08:46 AM (yZMsp)

10 Well, Google messed up the relevancy of this page

Posted by: threesome at November 13, 2005 03:41 AM (AqDGi)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Just go and read it already.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 10 words, total size 1 kb.

A certain chubby cheeked actress that Sheila hates is filing for an annulment. From a certain country singer that Sheila likes. A lot.

In her court filing, the chubby cheeker listed "fraud" as the reason she would like an annullment.

I'm sure Sheila would say that the fraud was on the part of the chubby cheeker. In fact, I know she will and I will update when she does.

I love making someone's day.

Posted by: Kathy at 09:42 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 84 words, total size 1 kb.

I've got bupkiss for you. It's been a very busy week around here, and it's not over with yet. Perhaps I'll get around to posting something tomorrow. You, my devoted Cake Eater Readers, will just have to tune in tomorrow to see. Anyway, until then, I'm going to dish out the linky love to keep everyone happy.

• You know how the Germans are crazy about David Hasselhoff? Well, the Belgians apparently feel the same way about Doug.
• Ever considered digging a hole to China? Take a looksee at this and see if you'll actually end up in China. I ended up somewhere in the middle of the Indian Ocean---so I won't be digging anywhere, thank you ever so much.
• In case you weren't aware, Goldstein is on a roll lately. Just keep scrolling, and then when you can scroll no more, go into the archives and keep scrolling.
• Our Maximum Leader had a, uh, religious experience on his commute in to Dee Cee the other day.
• Random Pensees has a question for the ladies
• Sadie's waxing rhapsodic over Steff. Yes, that man was fine. I actually wanted Molly Ringwald's Andie to reform him in Pretty in Pink rather than dealing with the mealy-mouthed, wishy-washy Lane.

  But that's just me.

Ok, that's enough from me. I've been so busy the past couple of days that it's obvious I'm behind on things. And since I've got more to do today---laundry, cocktail parties, dealing with a whopper head cold that one of my sister's offspring gave me as a parting gift---I need your help, my devoted Cake Eater Readers, to keep things interesting around here.

If you've got a link you'd like to promote, throw it into the comments. If you've read something interesting over the past few days and believe it could use a wee bit more publicity, go and throw it into the comments. I would only ask that you keep it clean and to please use hyperlinks. If you behave yourselves perhaps we can do this again sometime in the future.

God and head cold willing, I'll be back tomorrow.

Posted by: Kathy at 11:24 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 358 words, total size 2 kb.