November 24, 2005
Happy Thanksgiving
'TWAS THE NIGHT OF THANKSGIVING, BUT WE COULDN'T SLEEP
WE TRIED COUNTING BACKWARDS, WE TRIED COUNTING SHEEP.
THE LEFTOVERS BECKONED - THE DARK MEAT AND WHITE
BUT WE FOUGHT TEMPTATION WITH ALL OF OUR MIGHT
TOSSING AND TURNING WITH ANTICIPATION
THE THOUGHT OF A SNACK BECAME INFATUATION.
SO, WE RACED TO THE KITCHEN, FLUNG OPEN THE DOOR
AND GAZED AT THE FRIDGE, FULL OF GOODIES GALORE.
WE GOBBLED UP TURKEY AND BUTTERED POTATOES,
PICKLES AND CARROTS, BEANS AND TOMATOES.
WE FELT OURSELVES SWELLING SO PLUMP AND SO ROUND,
'TIL ALL OF A SUDDEN, WE ROSE OFF THE GROUND.
WE CRASHED THROUGH THE CEILING, UP INTO THE SKY
WITH A MOUTHFUL OF PUDDING, A HANDFUL OF PIE.
BUT, WE MANAGED TO YELL AS WE SOARED PAST THE TREES....
HAPPY EATING TO ALL - PASS THE CRANBERRIES, PLEASE.
MAY YOUR STUFFING BE TASTY, MAY YOUR TURKEY BE PLUMP.
MAY YOUR POTATOES 'N GRAVY HAVE NARY A LUMP,
MAY YOUR YAMS BE DELICIOUS MAY YOUR PIES TAKE THE PRIZE,
MAY YOUR THANKSGIVING DINNER STAY OFF OF YOUR THIGHS.
Happy Thanksgiving, my devoted Cake Eater Readers.
{Hat Tip: The Cake Eater Dad via Email}
Posted by: Kathy at
09:49 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Happy Thanksgiving, honey.
All the best to you and yours!
; )
Posted by: Chrissy at November 24, 2005 10:10 AM (zJsUT)
2
mm, i like that.
happy thanksgiving [belated though it is] to you and yourn, kathy. hope you're recovering from the leftovers!
Posted by: amelie at November 28, 2005 01:02 AM (J0CVQ)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 22, 2005
Blogger in Need
Minnesota Democrats Exposed
is in some serious trouble and needs help.
If you can do so, please help.
A related aside that should not be seen as a commentary on MDE's plight: this is the worst-case scenario that results from blogging anonymously. Most people blog anonymously and have no troubles with it. Some do, however---obviously. I can understand why people blog anonymously. However, it seems to me that if you choose to do so, you are simply putting a target on your back. By choosing to hide your identity, you are making it known to the world that you have something to lose by identifying yourself. Hence, the minute someone disagrees with you, and they want to get mean about it, they'll try to out you. And don't kid yourselves: no one is anonymous on the internet. Whois is just one click away and that's the beginning of the search.
In my humble opinion, it's easier to be yourself. When you have nothing to hide, you've got nothing to lose.
Posted by: Kathy at
10:13 PM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 176 words, total size 1 kb.
1
Still, some of us don't really have a choice about anonymous blogging.
Posted by: RP at November 23, 2005 03:33 PM (LlPKh)
2
And I DO understand that, RP.
It seems to me, however, that so many people jump on the anony-blogging bandwagon, thinking no one will be able to track them down; or that there are so many people who do blog anonymously that they'll just be one more in the crowd, and hence no one will come after them---and it's just not true. In other words, some people accurately estimate what the risk level is and others don't. The world is just chock a block full of assholes who live to out people to make a point.
Posted by: Kathy at November 23, 2005 04:28 PM (wN32K)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
Amateur Hour
This post is going to sound very inside baseball to my readers who don't blog, but for the ones who do, and who are paying attention to the whole Pajamas Media/OSM/Pajamas Media thing, well, golly gosh, eh? Are you ready for the latest installment?
How freakin' unprofessional is this? How amateurish of them, particularly after they admit to having met with a branding company. Not to mention the fact that they have VC and, as the husband put it, for them to have wound up in this spot, at least three people---including lawyers that the VC pays for---weren't doing their jobs.
This is embarrassing to watch. My face is turning red on their behalf.
{Hat tip: God}
Posted by: Kathy at
09:42 AM
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.
1
All I get is a log in page. So what is it that happened? I'm not really up on the latest shenanigans
Posted by: Ith at November 22, 2005 02:11 PM (Fv0oe)
2
they switched their name back to pajamas media because they didn't check that open source media was trademarked.
silly, silly stuff.
Posted by: Kathy at November 22, 2005 04:57 PM (wN32K)
3
Maybe they're closing down the OSM address already. That might be why the article doesn't show up any more.
Posted by: Pixy Misa at November 22, 2005 09:07 PM (RbYVY)
4
I thought that might be the case.
Posted by: Kathy at November 22, 2005 09:22 PM (wN32K)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 18, 2005
A Refresher Course in Commenting Etiquette
The Cake Eater Comment Policy
can be found here.
Ignore it at your peril.
Posted by: Kathy at
09:32 AM
| Comments (2)
| Add Comment
Post contains 26 words, total size 1 kb.
1
I posted the anon comment because I didn't feel like signing up not because I am afraid to be recognized. I get enough spam as it is. In my opinion, it seems that the bigger issue is that you didn't like my link because it didn't agree with the point of view that you were trying to put forth. I've noticed this before but let it slide since it's your blog. Interestingly, I found your site through Galley Slaves which allows for anonymous comments. Yes, it's a hassle and you will always have flamers, trolls, and their like. If you don't want to deal with that, then turn off comments.
As to the original post, the bar owner gave 4 things that had happened to him, any one of which could have (and probably did) contribute to the downturn in business and profits. While I sympathize with him (and with the smokers who ARE getting pushed around more and more), every business has regulatory nightmares to deal with. Since not every business is going bankrupt with the plethora of new regulations your owner has had to deal with, there must be ways to make money. I for one, choose Mpls venues over St Paul ones now since I know that they will be smoke free and the St Paul ones are likely to be smokey.
I'm not going to "challenge" you to keep this anon post up because that would be beneath both you and me. I will challenge you to be more open. I am for accountablility too but understand that not everyone wants to sign their name every time.
Sincerely,
Dean
Mpls
Posted by: Anon at November 18, 2005 10:10 AM (bkg0p)
2
Honestly, how hard is it to identify yourself? If you'd left a name to go with the link, your comment would have been untouched. Unfortunately, you couldn't be bothered. Hence, your comment was deleted.
End of story.
If you don't like the rules, you are more than welcome to go where they do allow anonymous commenting. I have no problems with that and I honestly and truly wish you well in your blog reading/commenting endeavors. If, however, you would like to repost your link in the appropriate spot, with your name attached to it, it won't be touched.
It's pretty simple.
I don't have a problem with dissent. I
do have a problem with people thinking they're entitled to do what they will on my blog and then when I disagree with their behavior, lecture me on how I should be running my blog. If you would like to run a blog, you should get your own.
Posted by: Kathy at November 18, 2005 12:44 PM (wN32K)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
November 15, 2005
23kb generated in CPU 0.1141, elapsed 0.1688 seconds.
53 queries taking 0.1419 seconds, 117 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
