Community Garden.

The organizers now include me, it seems. An email went out, an invitation to dine together and plan.

Call me prescient, but I'm predicting a wonderful Spring. The numbers are aligned, the seasons due, and after last summer and this winter, we are on a roll precipitation-wise. (= the ground is plenty soaked.)

Last night, the Warriors scored a win over Chippewa Falls (Jack!). A team without a winning record, so while there were some nice plays, both offensively and defensively, I wouldn't exactly call it an exciting win. Still, we haven't played at home in a while, and the evening walk(s) were refreshing.

My pal Mal is in Jamaica; years ago, he befriended a cab driver who lives in the mountains. They speak occasionally on the cell phones, Malcolm and Cecil. Mal is glad to find him requested appliance parts here, and quality shoes or tools from the second-hand stores. He's been back several times -- Roots Bamboo in Negril. Visited with him once, and it's a lush beautiful place. Fresh and honest.

Can't beat that combo.
like, Jamaica in January.

God bless these old bachelors. From the outside, sometimes, it loooks like their lives are lacking. But pro-choice lifestyles for men too, can be kind of appealing. Especially if you're starting with a solid pro-life mindset to begin with...

“Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on these things. ”




ADDED: I did catch some of the President's speech clips later, though. Smoked salmon? Is that like, You Can Tune a Piano, but You Can't Tuna Fish ? Eagles, right? Ah, a coded freedom reference then. What's not to like?

UPDATE: Doh! It's REO, of course.

Make it a great weekend,
and Keep On Rollin' ...
I'll be visiting w/young relatives myself, and on the road.

Think on These Things.

Shani O. Hilton shows that David Brooks, sadly, has company in his mentality.

I'm not trying to be flippant about this, because really, it's depressing. And even more depressing is the fact that women have to be gracious while answering, because these questions assume that marriage and babies are ever-present, important issues on every woman's mind. Again, it's little wonder that women are making such small inroads in Congress.

Mid Life Crisis.

Wow, David Brooks is on a roll lately.

If he weren't so gosh-darned straight, we might clicheshly wonder exactly what he's been smoking...

Young American men are not exactly famous for being in touch with their emotions. But Harold sensed that he was a social animal, not a laboring animal or a rational animal, and one day he went on a blind date with the woman — let’s call her Erica [blogger note: Erica it is. We can always get her to improve that name as needed. Maybe Sarah, say?] — who would someday be his wife. Given the stakes, we might pause over this incident, to show in slightly more detail how the inner processes of the mind interact with the conscious ones.

Harold and Erica got their first glimpse of each other in front of a Barnes & Noble. They smiled broadly as they approached, and a deep, primeval process kicked in. Harold liked what he saw, from the waist-to-hip ratio to the clear skin, all indicative of health and fertility. He enjoyed the smile that spread across Erica’s face, and unconsciously noted that the end of her eyebrows dipped down. The orbicularis-oculi muscle, which controls this part of the eyebrow, cannot be consciously controlled, so, when the tip of the eyebrow dips, that means the smile is genuine, not fake.

Erica was impressed by him: women everywhere tend to prefer men who have symmetrical features and are slightly older, taller, and stronger than they are. But she was more guarded and slower to trust than Harold was. That’s in part because, while Pleistocene men could pick their mates on the basis of fertility cues discernible at a glance, Pleistocene women faced a more vexing problem. Human babies require years to become self-sufficient, and a single woman in that environment could not gather enough calories to provide for a family. She was compelled to choose a man not only for insemination but for continued support. That’s why men leap into bed more quickly than women. Various research teams have conducted a simple study. They hire a woman to go up to college men and ask them to sleep with her. More than half the men say yes. Then they have a man approach college women with the same offer. Virtually zero per cent say yes.
...

The server came to their table and took their orders. The restaurant seemed to specialize in hard-to-eat salads. Erica, anticipating this, chose an appetizer that could be easily forked and a main dish that didn’t require cutlery expertise. But Harold went for a salad, composed of splayed green tentacles that could not be shoved into his mouth without brushing salad dressing on both of his cheeks. None of it mattered, because Harold and Erica clicked. Most emotional communication is nonverbal. Gestures are a language that we use not only to express our feelings but to constitute them. By making a gesture, people help produce an internal state. Harold and Erica licked their lips, leaned forward in their chairs, glanced at each other out of the corners of their eyes, and performed all the other tricks of unconscious choreography that people do while flirting. Erica did the head cant women do to signal romantic interest, a slight tilt of the head that exposes the neck. Then, there was the hair flip: she raised her arms to adjust her hair and heaved her chest into view. She would have been appalled if she had seen herself in a mirror at that moment.

Wow. And this, under the guise of intelligent "this is the social animal we are" study.

Speak for yourself, David. Really.
And then there's today's column:

In this century, economic competition between countries is less like the competition between armies or sports teams (with hermetically sealed units bashing or racing against each other). It’s more like the competition between elite universities, who vie for prestige in a networked search for knowledge. It’s less: “We will crush you with our efficiency and might.” It’s more: “We have the best talent and the best values, so if you want to make the most of your own capacities, you’ll come join us.”

The new sort of competition is all about charisma. It’s about gathering talent in one spot (in the information economy, geography matters more than ever because people are most creative when they collaborate face to face). This concentration of talent then attracts more talent, which creates more collaboration, which multiplies everybody’s skills, which attracts more talent and so on.

The nation with the most diverse creative hot spots will dominate the century.

If this is the nature of competitiveness, what is the role for government? Well, government will be a bit like the administration of a university. A university president is nominally the head of the institutions. He or she lives in the big house. But everybody knows a university president is a powerful stagehand.

The professors, the researchers, the tutors, the coaches and the students are the real guts of a university. They handle the substance of what gets done. The administrators play vital but secondary roles. They build the settings. They raise money. They recruit and do marketing. They help students who are stumbling.

The administrators couldn’t possibly understand or control the work in the physics or history departments. They just try to gather talent, set guidelines and create an atmosphere where brilliance can happen.

So it is with government in an innovation economy.
...
Finally, the government has to work aggressively to reduce the human capital inequalities that open up in an innovation economy. That means early and constant interventions so everybody has a chance to participate.

Clearly, this one was written and banked well before the reports of how American undergrads are being disserved by their university educations.

The line that killed me, though, is this:

It’s about gathering talent in one spot (in the information economy, geography matters more than ever because people are most creative when they collaborate face to face). This concentration of talent then attracts more talent, which creates more collaboration, which multiplies everybody’s skills, which attracts more talent and so on.

Right-o.
Because surely nobody has thought about how "outside" voices -- those on the blogs outside the WaPo and NYT newsrooms, say -- are influencing what we write and read daily.

Nope, if you ain't there, your voice isn't being heard and considered in the national conversation. It's an army of davids that the Goliaths need not fear. It's an Invisible Man living within his modest means, pursuing his needs and dreams independently; why should Brooks consider those creatures?
Scary stuff indeed! But does he read his own work?
Consider this bit, on "overconfidence":

Paul J. H. Schoemaker and J. Edward Russo gave questionnaires to more than two thousand executives in order to measure how much they knew about their industries. Managers in the advertising industry gave answers that they were ninety-per-cent confident were correct. In fact, their answers were wrong sixty-one per cent of the time. People in the computer industry gave answers they thought had a ninety-five per cent chance of being right; in fact, eighty per cent of them were wrong. Ninety-nine per cent of the respondents overestimated their success.

Leave the kids alone, DB. They don't need your helpful tips, or scientific analysis, on how to live and lead their own lives.

Buy a little red sports car instead, and blast a lil Prince. That'll cure ya:

I guess I should have known
by the way you parked your car -- sideways!
that it wouldn't last
...
Little Red Corvette
Baby, you're much too fast (yes you are)
Little Red Corvette
You need to find a love that's gonna last...

Same "message" Brooks was going for, just not so prejudiced ("boys do this; girls like this"). And waaaaayy cooler. (You got to teach Harold some cool if he's not going to bore that lady in the years to come. The wallet bulge fails to impress the chicas after time, I've heard they found that out in some lady study. No really -- look it up.)

"It Ain't Me, Babe."

Law professor Ilya Somin, on the Volokh legal blog, discusses the slippery slope present if you can legally mandate individuals to purchase private health insurance:

The logic of the pro-health care mandate argument can justify virtually any mandate to purchase or do anything. This opens the door to the machinations of a extraordinarily large number of interest groups. It seem very likely that at least a few of them will figure out a way to take advantage of the opportunity. Even if I can’t figure out exactly how to do it, interest group leaders and other professional political strategists probably can.

Indeed, at least one industry interest group already has managed to do it. After all, the health insurance mandate was included in the health care bill in large part because insurance companies support it, and in spite of the fact that President Obama had strongly opposed the idea when Hillary Clinton proposed it during the 2008 presidential campaign. Where the insurance industry leads, others might well follow.

It's wonderful to want to promise people with pre-existing conditions no changes in coverage. Not so honorable to want to treat those under 26 as youth to be covered on their parents policies.*

It's also great to want to revamp the health insurance business, to give them an advantage in covering the country.

But you can't rob from Peter to pay Paul. No fair confiscating from those without pre-existing conditions, who pay for their minimal healthcare needs out-of-pocket and choose to invest their personal health budget for products and services other than private insurance.

I'm not even going to touch the system's inherent unfairness as it stands: if legal rules exclude recognition of some types of families under some types of plans, why should those affected essentially subsidize another recognized family's care? Voluntarily, if you want to opt in to those plans, bully for you.

But if you choose to go it alone -- not costing the system, nor asking for any additional coverage for oneself or unrecognized family -- you can't force the purchase from those being penalized for continuing to maintain good health of their own. The unfairness must end somewhere, and ending the mandate would force the private insurance industry to look internally for legal (Constitutional) solutions to the problems of their own making.

Those without outstanding bills, pre-existing conditions, or demands for more, more, more care did not create this mess, and increasingly we resent our pockets being picked as the only "solution".







*I belong to the "18 and Out" mindset that encourages young people in their prime to get out from under their parents' roof and mindsets, to begin creating their own lives. Whether it be school, jobs, military, or self-financed travel, it's crazy to think that somehow in the past 100 years we've evolved out the adventure and need for independence from people biologically early 20s... My father left his homeland -- eldest of 7; he stood to inherit the land even -- and created a new life for himself. My brother, who didn't attend college, got an efficiency in Chicago, and began working and paying his way the June he turned 18 and graduated high school. Don't tell me it can't be done for those who are not "college material". We've seen what happens too, when those young adults are sheltered in their parents homes for too long, instead of getting out and either making their own way, or being recognized early on for the troubles they have coping in society.

Wait Until Next Year...

Charles Woodson of the NFC Champion Green Bay Packers:

"If the President don't want to come watch us in the Super Bowl... Guess what? We'll go see him!"

(Cheers. Laughter. Clapping)

"White House on 3: 1-2-3- WHITE HOUSE!"

Go get 'em, Pack.

Always Thinking of Others...

That Rahm. Not for himself does he come off so convoluted, but for clarity. For the voters. Of course...

“The Supreme Court has an obligation -- not an obligation -- to hear the case, to make a decision quickly, so both not only voters have a clarity they need, but there’s a clarity to the issues we are discussing in front of the voters as it relates to the challenges that we have as a city for our future," Emanuel said.

Time is of the essence. Early voting starts a week from today on Jan. 31. An elections board spokesman said ballots have not been printed yet but are scheduled to be printed mid-week.

Later, Langdon D. Neal, the elections board chairman, issued a statement: "We're going to press with one less candidate for mayor."

Elections board spokesman Jim Allen said ballots are being printed tonight.

“We’ve basically hit the go button,” Allen said. “We needed to do this on the 18th, we were waiting for this decision. We going to press now, we have to.”

“A candidate who is removed from the ballots by the courts has until Feb. 15 to file as a write-in,” Allen said.

Tinker to Evers to Chance.

or, Emanuel to Obama to Daley
In the expert economic pundit discussion of Bill Daley's move to Chief of Staff, it's like they're all too busy pontificating to state the obvious:

Daley got in under Clinton, because he represented Chicago political power. Obama was groomed in Chicago, by Clinton underling and native Chicagoan Emanuel, who helped put the first black president in the White House. Obama naturally took Emanuel along to help drive the administration, and when brother Daley decided he'd had enough of mayoring Chicago and it was time to step aside, the place was held for Emanuel as the other Daley slips into his administration role.

Now: after saying that, how serious do we take the discussions of Daley's business qualifications, his big position at Goldman that surely came also because of his family political clout? Not too seriously. They're covering themselves, making sure they run Chicago (God help the city under a man like Emanuel who serves -- first and foremost -- himself) and pushing the country to play those kind of "competitive", "achievement" games. Where you fix the system, rig the games, and nothing is on the square. ... But it's fixed so you can assure yourself, and your buddies, a win -- no matter the competition, or quality of your game.

Mr. Emanuel has benefited from the delayed implementation of new campaign finance rules in Illinois. Prior to Jan. 1, individuals could donate unlimited sums but are now limited to $5,000 each. His campaign’s donor list includes a $75,000 check from Hollywood director Steven Spielberg, more than $200,000 from members of the wealthy Pritzker family, and $10,000 from screenwriter Aaron Sorkin, whose TV drama “The West Wing” featured hot-tempered White House aide Josh Lyman, based on Mr. Emanuel’s years in the Clinton administration.

Except today ... there's a fly in the ointment.

By Daily Herald Report
An Illinois Appeals Court has ruled that Rahm Emanuel's name can't appear on the ballot for Chicago mayor because he didn't live in the city in the year before the election. The voted 2-1 on Monday to overturn a lower court ruling to keep Emanuel's name on the Feb. 22 ballot. The case now goes to the Illinois Supreme Court.

Those challenging Emanuel have said the White House chief of staff did not meet a residency requirement because he lived in Washington and not Chicago when he worked for President Barack Obama. Emanuel has said he always intended to return to Chicago and was only living in Washington at the request of the president.

Balanced government.
The City That Works.
Checks and balances.
Go Appeals Court!*

(Somewhere today, I can hear Mike Royko laughing...)
----------------
*The issues in this appeal distill essentially to two: whether
the candidate meets the Municipal Code’s requirement that he have
"resided in the municipality at least one year next preceding the
election" (65 ILCS 5/3.1-10-5(a) (West 2008)), and, if not, whether
he is exempt from that requirement under the Election Code
provision stating that "no elector *** shall be deemed to have lost
his or her residence *** by reason of his or her absence on
business of the United States" (10 ILCS 5/3-2 (West 2008)).

Each of these issues presents, first, a legal question requiring
construction of the relevant statutory provisions, and, second,
assuming the Board applied the correct standard (see Du Page County
Airport Authority v. Department of Revenue, 358 Ill. App. 3d 476,
498 n.4, 831 N.E.2d 30 (2005)), a mixed question of law and fact
regarding the Board’s application of that standard. We review the
legal questions de novo and any mixed questions under the clearly
erroneous standard.

We begin by analyzing the statutory requirements to be a
candidate for municipal office, which are located in subsection
1-10-5(a) of the Municipal Code:
"A person is not eligible for an elective municipal
office unless that person is a qualified elector of the
municipality and has resided in the municipality at least one
year next preceding the election or appointment ***." 65 ILCS
5/3.1-10-5(a) (West 2008).

In its decision, to determine whether the candidate met the
Municipal Code’s requirement that he have "resided in" the
municipality for one year, the Board applied the test for residency
that has been used for voter qualification under the Election Code.
This approach is supported by several appellate court decisions
that, without discussion, equate residency requirements imposed on
voters with requirements that a candidate "resided in" his or her
political unit. See e.g., People ex rel. Madigan v. Baumgartner,
355 Ill. App. 3d 842, 847-48, 823 N.E.2d 1144 (2005) (stating only
that it would treat the terms as synonymous "because eligibility to
run for office is closely linked to the ability to vote within a
particular jurisdiction"); Walsh v. County Officers Electoral Board
of Cook County, 267 Ill. App. 3d 972, 976, 642 N.E.2d 843 (1994)
(assuming implicitly that the terms were synonymous); Delk v. Board
of Election Commissioners of the City of Chicago, 112 Ill. App. 3d
735, 738, 445 N.E.2d 1232 (1983).

Neither the Board nor the parties have, however, referred us
to any supreme court opinion ratifying, adopting, or directly
addressing this approach. The only cited supreme court case to approach the issue is Smith v. People ex rel. Frisbie, 44 Ill. 16(1867), a quo warranto action decided under the presumption that the candidate had a right to the office to which he had b eenappointed and in which the court required the objectors to establish the candidate’s disqualification by "clear and
satisfactory" proof. See Smith, 44 Ill. at 24-25. We know of no
similar presumption applicable to this case, and the objectors here
bore the less stringent burden to prove the candidate’s
disqualification by a preponderance of the evidence. See Board of
Election Commissioners of the City of Chicago, Rules of Procedure
10 ("[T]he objector must bear the burden of proving by operation of
law and by a preponderance of the *** evidence *** that the
objections are true.")
...
The exception traces to Illinois’ founding charter, which imposed a residency requirement on state representatives but excepted those who were "absent on the
public business of the United States." Ill. Const. 1818, art. II,
§3. Illinois’ next constitution, in 1848, stated the exception
three times: once for state representatives (Ill. Const. 1848, art.
III, §3), once for state senators (Ill. Const. 1848, art. III, §4),
and once for voters (Ill. Const. 1848, art. VI, §5). The 1848
Constitution thus separately delineated "business of the United
States" exceptions for candidates and for voters. Illinois’ next
constitution, in 1870, retained the "business of the United States"
exception as it related to voters (see Ill. Const. 1870, art. VII,
§4), yet conspicuously omitted the exception as it related to
candidates. (The voter exception was later incorporated into the
Election Code (see 1959 Ill. Laws 2168) and was not included in our
current constitution.) This history tells us that, for purposes of
the "business of the United States" residency exception, this State
has for over 150 years recognized a distinction between voters and
candidates and has retained the exception only for voters. That
revelation, combined with our interpretation of the language of
section 3-2 and its interrelation with subsection 3.1-10-5(d) of
the Municipal Code, convinces us that section 3-2's "business of
the United States" exception applies only to voters, not to
candidates. Accordingly, it cannot avail the candidate here.
For the foregoing reasons, we conclude that the candidate
neither meets the Municipal Code’s requirement that he have
"resided in" Chicago for the year preceding the election in which
he seeks to participate nor falls within any exception to the
requirement. Accordingly, we disagree with the Board’s conclusion
that he is eligible to run for the office of Mayor of the City of
Chicago. We reverse the circuit court’s judgment confirming the
Board’s decision, set aside the Board’s decision, and, pursuant to
Supreme Court Rule 366(a)(5) (Ill. Sup. Ct. R. 366(a)(5) (eff. Feb.
1, 1994)), order that the candidate’s name be excluded (or, if
necessary, removed) from the ballot for the February 22, 2011,
Chicago mayoral election.

Reversed.

ADDED: Ah, the all-important "right to choose".

“It’s a surprise,” said Kevin Forde, the attorney who argued on Emanuel’s behalf.

Emanuel is expected to comment on the ruling at a 1:30 p.m. appearance at The Berghoff in the Loop.

The Emanuel campaign sent out a text to its supporters asking them to assemble at 5 p.m. at Dearborn and Washington to “rally for Rahm’s right to be on the ballot and let Chicagoans choose.”
...
(Candidate Miguel) Del Valle, in a statement, brought up the $11.7 million that Emanuel has collected in just three months to bankroll a mayoral campaign that has now been thrust into legal limbo.

“It looked like money was going to decide this election,” del Valle said. “The voters now have a rare opportunity to shape this city’s future.”

The Board of Elections has not yet printed up the ballot.

Odelson said Board of Elections attorney Jim Scanlon told him that as of this moment, Emanuel’s name would stay off the ballot.

Emanuel’s attorneys will likely ask for a “stay” of the order today or Tuesday. If that is granted, Emanuel’s name could go back on the ballot.

Ald. Pat O’Connor (40th), Daley’s City Council floor leader, is among a handful of North Side ward bosses firmly in Emanuel’s camp. If the Supreme Court affirms Monday’s ruling or takes a pass, O’Connor would be like a man without a country.

“It puts me where I’ve always been. I’ve supported Rahm since he announced. I’ll support him until it’s determined he can no longer be a mayoral candidate,” O’Connor said.

Pressed to identify his second choice, O’Connor said, “I wouldn’t even speculate on that. I’m hoping he’s on the ballot and it works out. If not, we’ll reassess and see who’ll have us. If the polls are correct, Gery Chico and Carol Moseley Braun are pretty close. I don’t know who would become the frontrunner. But, I’m not quite certain I’m giving up on our current frontrunner.”

UPDATE: Emanuel, speaking to reporters at The Berghoff in the Loop, said he is confident he will win an appeal and return to the ballot.

“I have no doubt at the end we will prevail,” Emanuel said. “As my father has said, nothing is ever easy.”
...
In today’s ruling, Hoffman wrote: “We ... order that the candidate’s name be excluded (or if, necessary, be removed) from the ballot.”

Chicago’s bar associations have always rated Justice Hoffman as one of the most knowledgable judges on the appellate court. He has published numerous books and other judges often cite his opinions.

He dominated the questioning at oral arguments Wednesday, pressing Emanuel’s attorneys hard on whether Emanuel could really “dwell conceptually” in a house he could not enter.

For the Love of a Lady.

You know, the old grey one that has served me so well all these years...

I neglected her. She's 200 miles over the regularly changed 3,000 mile oil interval. In this weather, that's not especially nice for an old car.

Yesterday, I considered going out to make a connection, for a quick Internet fix. But it wasn't fair, asking her to get started up on our subzero, coldest day of the year. The temps all day were climbing slowly upward, finally breaking zero at about 6pm last night. Then, some of the fluffiest snow... little moisture, but with these cold temps, it made the most of it, sizewise. I cleared my vents this morning with a strong breath, so light was this latest snowfall.

The car turned over this morning on her first try -- remember this is outside parked, with no battery warmer either. No doubt she would have done the same yesterday.

Still, sometimes you owe them a day off. And getting in for an oil change is high on my list of Saturday errands.

You get what you give, afterall.

ADDED: I predict a mini-baby boom in the Twin Cities/Wisconsin area come next Halloween. Odds are some men are currently snuggling with fertile women to keep warm. And you know what they say...

Familiarity breeds children.

"I'd like to teach... the world to sing."

Nevermind perfect harmony though.
We haven't the time...


*Leaders don't force people to follow—they invite them on a journey. ...

Keep those feet movin' people!
and Happy Hump Day.

The Opposite of the Invisible Man?

The T.M.I. woman:

I was not only including rape in the curriculum (unheard of at the time), but was actually telling students of my own experience in the criminal justice system as a rape victim and how it shaped my views on the law. I thought it was a nice piece.
...
Someone called me at home, claiming to be a student of mine, and threatened to rape me again — because I probably enjoyed it — by semester's end. ... The dean of Harvard Law School at the time, the late Jim Vorenberg, graciously found excuses to come visit me and sit and see if the phone would ring as we waited for the semester to end.

One of my colleagues was one of the world's experts in psychiatry and the law, including issues relating to predicting dangerousness. I asked his advice. Should I be scared? Should I be terrified?
...
If the nattering nabobs of narcissism could stop talking about themselves long enough to focus on what actually happened in Arizona, perhaps we could find some way to help those who are seriously ill before others pay the price.

I know we fear copycat killers. Who knew so many would identify with the victims, recounting their own fears after being on the receiving end of nasty words?

Perhaps this explains the visceral dislike by some of Sarah Palin, who exudes strength and refuses, it seems, to put herself in the womanly victim role, no matter how many verbal cheap shots she and her family members absorb.


ADDED: I wonder if the client in the excerpt below remembers consenting to having his HIPPA protected medical information and legal dealings made public as column fodder?

I recently tried to help a young man who desperately needs mental health assistance. He suffers from uncontrollable epilepsy, which is now complicated by episodes of what appears to be uncontrolled rage. He threatened his mother with a knife, and when police arrived, he literally could not remember making the threat. He says people are talking to him inside his head.

We sat for hours at the county clinic, but he doesn't have Medical or Social Security Disability. In an interview for which neither his sister nor I was present, he told someone that he owns one-fifth of a house in Central America (which he doesn't). That was enough to disqualify him. While I appeal that, the best we can do is a private doctor who has agreed to see him for reduced rates every other week.

Invisible Man. Ralph Ellison.

Name that Novel:

"Avoid this gentle poison by figuring out ways you can mock the system by taking from it what it needs to give you to maintain your writing, and give it nothing back in return."

Didn't end well for Ellison, iirc, in terms of output. Still, many intelligent young people seem to emulate that lifestyle... for a time.

It's no doubt temporarily appealing to those undergoing rapid disillusionment -- the dropping out idea -- and for that reason, Ellison's slim output will have eternal life wherever young people still read.

Especially as "underground" reading in totalitarian societies.

21st Century international market and all.

Mike Singletary to the Vikings...

as linebackers coach to help out head coach Leslie Frazier.

Lovie might just get a game from the Purple next year, led by these former Bears teammates.

Speaking of,
who remembers Lovie's self-pronounced goals when he was named head coach himself?

Competitive blogging.

During teaching days, I look forward to the week-end, when Ed and I will inevitably try to bike, camp, ski, build trails, take out a kayak, an iceboat, a canoe, plant a garden – and on those days blogging is a charmed effort...

Perhaps it was physical immaturity, but I never played the "my b/f is better/bigger than your b/f" game some of the other girls seemed to have going on in middle school either. Now today I read David Brooks of all people, giving advice to teenage girls on how to be liked.

Ah, the old "go along to get along" achievement scale.*

Practicing a piece of music for four hours requires focused attention, but it is nowhere near as cognitively demanding as a sleepover with 14-year-old girls. Managing status rivalries, negotiating group dynamics, understanding social norms, navigating the distinction between self and group — these and other social tests impose cognitive demands that blow away any intense tutoring session or a class at Yale.
...
I wish she recognized that in some important ways the school cafeteria is more intellectually demanding than the library. And I hope her daughters grow up to write their own books, and maybe learn the skills to better anticipate how theirs will be received.

He misses the point. (and why am I reading an underlying dig at Paul Krugman in those last lines ... kicking a man while he's down. Perhaps David was so busy studying the girls' learning track, he missed out on the social lessons generally learned by boys?)

Trouble is, if you endorse these popularity contests instead of allowing individualism to grow for it's own sake and develop naturally, your daughter's values are only as good as the top dog in the social "group", and overconfidence can strike -- indeed, often does -- the "team" as a whole.

See American academic achievement v. the Asian countries. They're not worried about prom dates so much, or who's the alpha at the sleepover. Whose boyfriend is bigger or better (the richer scale comes later, I think.) Or more telling, scoring just one point higher than whomever currently leads the class.

Or "purging" the temporarily stored info immediately after the test.

The Asian achievement bars are raised much higher than just one-upping the girl next door. (The American adult version: having a bigger SUV, house, extra child, higher name college, latest technology etc. than others in your peer group.) That's Chua's point, being missed, it seems.

David Brooks' confidence, I believe, stems from his not seeing, or plain misreading, the true international competition we're facing. Thinking in old ways: that the game will always favor the more popular, the one least likely to rub someone the wrong way. Like how he admires President Obama's career track. (But Sarah Palin is ... a joke. Never forget.)

Except, that path -- the "go along to get along" of today, over the precise achievement scale of tomorrow, nevermind social sales skills (can you say: coding?) -- will be harder and harder for lesser educated American youth to navigate, no matter how their fathers might try to map the way. And remember, it's not just the upper middle class sons and daughters playing for Team America. You've got to factor everyone's scores in -- the girls who didn't do so well at the sleepover, as well as those excluded from the reindeer games. Kinda brings down the popular girls' average advantage because, of course, the "team" can't win -- it's disincentivized, in fact -- in this current system.

Which is why we have bigger and bigger "winners", like in the financial field, while the country's fortunes as a whole sour... (ie/ Pete Orswag. "star" player on losing teams.)

Without the American "extra credit" points earned by our forefathers reshaping the world in the immediate aftermath of World War II, it won't be as easy as Brooks makes it out to be, I think. Saying that as a realist coming up without so much his generation's taken-for-granted advantages.

I just can't believe the current NYT philosopher-king honestly thinks the answer to America's academic ills today is paying more attention to the cafeteria games, instead of recognizing it's the poor diet in our classrooms that needs to be re-imagined to maximize the economy through strong and healthy minds.

"Above My Pay Grade."

or, In Over My Head?

Over at the NYT,Krugman is again explaining his comments filters -- twisting and spinning -- given the pushback he's been getting after the Tucson massacre and the continuing need for public discourse on issues that affect all Americans.

(Did you think we'd all go hide under our beds, Paul?)

Column Comments
Some readers are weighing in with questions and complaints about the moderating process for comments on my column (as opposed to this blog). So what you need to know is that this is not my department: I don’t play any role in that process. The public editor had a nice piece about how all that works. I do worry a bit that given the timing at which columns are posted, European commenters may have a head start; I don’t know what can be done about that.

Anyway, once the column goes up, I don’t know what goes down; that’s not my department …



Comments are not being accepted for this post.

Heh. European discourse suits him. I don't think he could handle the honest thoughts and evaluations of his economic work from plain-speaking Americans. And yeah, there is something wrong with that.

Namely, you can't accuse the American people of operating in a hateful political cauldron with their words and their grass-roots organizing this past year because they disagree with the untested (outside of the theoretical realm) public policy prescriptions the all-knowing experts are pushing on the country... and then turn around and not let them speak to defend themselves against such a false mischaracterization.

Sticks and stones may break my bones,
but words can never hurt me.

They say in a crisis, the true colors come out. I think in the past week, we've all seen Krugman's. Something to consider if you continue reading his work...

NFC Country, Playoff Week II.

Again, a weekend of surprises in the football world. Out with some of the big names; in with some who have paid their dues, waiting in the wings...

Brent who?
The Packers and Jets are still standing, minus the big name player who added so much fun all those years. If only we could get John Madden back to call this one: Bears and Packers in the black-and-blue league -- NFC Central divisional game... plus.

With the Patriots out, surely there's extra motivation in the NFC, no matter which team steps up and takes it Sunday.

Defense, defense, defense.

Coffee Shop Signage.

ADDED: Or you could just move...
into the apartment building next to mine...

Another Friday on the Tuscobia Trail.

"The Cross"




(apropos of last week's post)



January Christmas tree.

The Jack London look. (Jack Dublin?)

Sharing the Trail.(Rare on weekday afternoons, and you hear 'em coming...)






Uphill...

...




And down...


But keep it straight over the bridge...

or end up in the drink.(Because we all know what happens to Harry Bailey if big brother George isn't there to rescue him! )

Have a weekend full of wonder, whatever you're up to and where...

Bless the Beasts and the Children...

for the world will never be,
the world they see...

David Kopel gets it...

given his background in "traditional" journalism, perhaps.

This isn't a Ted Kaczynski or Timothy McVeigh on the complexity level even, so why are his possible motives -- "suicide, interrupted" -- being explored as entertainment news?

War is Peace.

Debt is Prosperity.

Must be getting early,
clocks are running late.
Paint by numbers morning sky
looks so phony...

Dawn is breaking everywhere.
Light a candle, curse the glare.
Draw the curtains, I don't care
Cuz, it's all right.
...
I see you've got your list out:
Say your piece and get out.
Yes I get the gist of it, but...
It's all right.

That one goes out to all those sickening me with their preaching -- those pretending expertise, for pay, in all matters...



And this one...
this one goes out to Rep. Giffords, who can't afford to be cocky right now, given the incredible obstacles still ahead, and those still dead. But sing along those of us who can afford to be cocky on her behalf. Strength still beats weakness afterall.

You come on with a comeon.
You don't fight fair.
That's ok; see if I care.

Knock me down, it's all in vain...
I'll get right back on my feet again.

Hit me with your best shot.
C'mon: hit me with your best shot.
Hit me with your best shot...
Fire Away.

Maybe you prefer Elton John, I'm Still Standing? You get the idea. Don't let this loser think he's won, now that he's got all the media types giving his "message" and lifestory big play.

You don't fight fair...

"I prefer this to the alternative."

~John Green, father of the 9-year old killed this weekend, speaking of the tragedies that can happen living in the free world.

With his child born on 9-11, and a worldly job inside baseball that took him across the country, surely Mr. Green has had time to think about what he's saying. "I prefer this to the alternative", even now when he's down, when he's paying such a price for bringing his daughter up to live life in freedom.

God bless the Green family. Their strength is what we should be concentrating on to get the nation through, not the sad motivations of the killer. There are a million potential immature killers -- look at the suicide rates -- but there are very few children whose deaths aren't worth pages and pages of copy, and hours and hours of video footage.

Keep your eye on the ball, America!

NFC Country.

Depending on where you live, I wonder if the Monday morning office talk will be more of the football playoffs, or the killings in Arizona.

So many weekend surprises, which one do you think people will be more inclined to talk about where you're at?
-------------

Have a great day -- get ready to peak tomorrow, eh?: 1-11-11. Lay out something nice to wear, at least, that's a big day...

Write of what you know; hold your tongue; or

... risk looking a fool?

Digging himself in deeper and deeper, Andrew Sullivan and perhaps his co-bloggers(?), continue to ... make shit up. If you know American "history", or more correctly -- current events, then by all means, cite it.

But if you are perhaps a fresh transplant, unschooled on American sports, and ... if not sheltered exactly, then limited certainly in your own American cultural transactions -- perhaps given the DC and Provincetown addresses, the posh ivy education scene, and no drivers license, as I understand it -- please don't tell me no one has ever pulled a gun over a basketball game.

The truth is: that kind of language is out on a limb even in the most gung-ho sports-speak, let alone politics. No one, moreover, is going to pull out a gun while playing in a basketball game.* American history is littered with examples of people pulling out a gun in politics.

This further digging follows what passes for an editorial correction in today's new media, after Andrew/co-bloggers are corrected for not getting a sports parody Palin apparently posted during March Madness.

(Hint to Andrew: that Madness refers to the basketball tourneys heating up, not any mentally unstable condition that collectively overtakes the American people during that time.)

I dislike Sarah Palin (almost) as much as you do, but her March Madness post chock full of violent metaphors was written not out of the blue but rather as a sarcastic response to press/blogospheric criticism that she had gone too far with her "crosshairs" and "don't retreat, reload" political rhetoric. It's not just a random post proving that she can't even talk about sports without discussing over-the-top violence. Rather, she purposefully, and sarcastically, filled the post with as much battle imagery as possible to show that the type of metaphors she had been using in her political rhetoric -- and that she was being criticized for in the press and in the blogosphere -- are in fact commonplace in sports lingo.
...
Battle imagery and violent metaphors in relation to sports are commonplace and, in my opinion, largely harmless. If Palin's post had actually been about sports, then I don't think it would be worth discussing. But the subtext of her post is that there is no difference between the use of battle imagery in sports talk and in political rhetoric. Plainly, there is. That Palin does not seem to recognize that is, I think, the more disturbing implication of her March Madness post.

Yep, that context matters, and changes things a little. But if anything - for the worse, as my reader explains.

Finally,
there's a reason our amendments are ranked in that order, you know. One and Two. Being British born, and originally coming up under another culture, I wonder if you can appreciate that.


-------------

* Ha. Ha. Ha. "No one, moreover, is going to pull out a gun while playing in a basketball game."

We wish...

ADDED:
Jeffrey Goldberg chomps hard on the same bait as Sullivan. He too, I think, spent his formative years outside the American sports scene (coming of age on a kibbutz in Israel, iirc).

If it doesn't come naturally, you probably should educate yourself on other cultures (ie/sports talk) before projecting your own thoughts on to others. Or following another gullible "leader" on such issues. (here, Sullivan on sports talk.)

Fwiw. It really was, pretty obviously, over the top, no?

The Final Four is an intense, contested series (kind of like a heated, competitive primary election), so best of luck to all teams, and watch for this principle lived out: the team that wins is the team that wants it more.

To the teams that desire making it this far next year: Gear up! In the battle, set your sights on next season’s targets! From the shot across the bow – the first second’s tip-off – your leaders will be in the enemy’s crosshairs, so you must execute strong defensive tactics. You won’t win only playing defense, so get on offense! The crossfire is intense, so penetrate through enemy territory by bombing through the press, and use your strong weapons – your Big Guns – to drive to the hole. Shoot with accuracy; aim high and remember it takes blood, sweat and tears to win.

Focus on the goal and fight for it. If the gate is closed, go over the fence. If the fence is too high, pole vault in. If that doesn’t work, parachute in. If the other side tries to push back, your attitude should be “go for it.” Get in their faces and argue with them. (Sound familiar?!) Every possession is a battle; you’ll only win the war if you’ve picked your battles wisely. No matter how tough it gets, never retreat, instead RELOAD!

- Sarah Palin

Overinflating his importance.

Ever the urge to jump on a hot news story, this new breed of 21st Century "journalists" proves no different.

Remember a few weeks back, when in Wisconsin, a crazy man ticked off about Palin's daughter on the dancing reality show shot out his tv screen? Was it because nobody died that we had enough brains to laugh at his actions, and didn't waste a single minute seriously giving voice to his "complaints" ?

Mentally ill man. Laugh and move on...

Why -- because this younger one has naturally proven more deadly -- do we have 3 NYT reporters giving this sick man's motivations serious consideration? Because he can kill?

I know journalism is a business, and I know this story "has legs". It's good copy, and some people will consume whatever you can throw at them on bloody bad stories like this...

But this?
Bloodshed Puts New Focus on Vitriol in Politics
By CARL HULSE and KATE ZERNIKE
The shooting focused attention on the degree to which inflammatory language has become part of the political culture.
and this?
A Turning Point in the Discourse, but in Which Direction?
By MATT BAI
It’s hard not to think the shooting was partly influenced by a debate that often seems to conflate disagreement with Armageddon.


Newspeople:
he can only steer this discussion with his violence if you, predictably, take the bait and give his unformed opinions extra points because he had the audacity to accompany them with gunfire.

One hybrid expert pundit has reacted by shutting down his open comments forum, telling us he saw this climate of violence coming, after just telling us how much he values free speech and honest discussion on hot-button national issues.

Telling that the violent actions of one caused him such fear and only reinforced his political conclusions, it seems.

If there's any "message" to be unearthed in these stories of mentally ill men and guns is should be this: No Effect, No Turning Point in the Rational Discourse, in either direction.

This mentally ill killer deserves no more a forum for his political thoughts than the Wisconsin "tv killer" was taken seriously for his dance criticism.

Skip the laugh, but let's do move on...

--------------


ADDED: This is a self fulfilling prophecy we don't need, no matter how determined some seem to make these killings representative of the national discourse on controversial issues* like healthcare particularly:

WASHINGTON — The shooting of Representative Gabrielle Giffords and others at a neighborhood meeting in Arizona on Saturday set off what is likely to be a wrenching debate over anger and violence in American politics.

While the exact motivations of the suspect in the shootings remained unclear, an Internet site tied to the man, Jared Lee Loughner, contained antigovernment ramblings. And regardless of what led to the episode, it quickly focused attention on the degree to which inflammatory language, threats and implicit instigations to violence have become a steady undercurrent in the nation’s political culture.

*If you thought it was hard to talk about Bristol Palin and dancing reality, wait until we continue confronting budget issues, with serious national choices, in the years to come. To pretend the hard discussions won't happen because there's a fear somebody could go off and shoot out a tv, or even an innocent child bystander, that's a fool's wish no matter how you're inclined to spin it.

Let the victims of this senseless tragedy rest in peace, without having to find greater meaning for basic killing actions (doesn't take a genius to shoot out a tv, afterall), or overinflate the importance of mentally ill people on serious national discussions.

** More melodrama ("A Prayer for Owen Meany"), as the new mediums explore ways to exploit deliver the news in popular commercial packages to their young readers.

A prayer too for the dark and twisted soul who committed this act, because it is also a Christian duty to see the human in him as well.

And a prayer that, whatever the precise dynamic that brought this evil to the surface, we can get past the violent rhetoric of our time and the poisonous polarization that fuels it. It has been ugly; it has been cruel; it has been reckless.

And it has to end.
...
More tomorrow as we recover more facts.

Heh. After Arizona indeed.

Today...

I did something crazy.

I had a nice plastic sled -- two of 'em actually: a red and a black -- in the storage locker. Pulled out the black one, and walked far enough down the Tuscobia Trail to the big hill, where the sign warns: "Dip".

Three times I went down the far hill. The third time, naturally, the fastest. The bottom of the hill takes you over a narrow (enough) bridge, over (what we would call in my hometown...) a crick.

I learned, after only three, that indeed, I gained the fastest speed "luging", with my head and body back, looking up, shifting my knees to guide me...

It was great! Been a long time since I've been sledding, and with the fresh powder this morning, something just told me it was the time to go.

But after only three, I felt the winds kick in, and started back down the trail using the black sled as a wind shield. Got my cardio in after only three trips up; and being alone, and achieving higher speeds each run, I didn't want to chance losing control at the bottom, and breaking my neck rolling off, while steering me down.
----------
Last night,
in a comeback OT win, our Rice Lake Warriors beat Menomonie, 6-5. For $5 and a 10-minute walk down the street, it was well worth it.

Though I like to sit out in the cold, preferring not to mix it up -- even between periods -- in what I like to call the heated "Germ Exchange", you see familar faces from about town, and other sports, and it's good to be amongst community.

Not being an integral part of the small town is good -- you don't know or care about the town dramas, if any -- yet you can still support and enjoy the local team. It's healthy, I think, watching these prep games at such a close level. In Madison, I always treated myself to a state tourney ticket in March, just to watch the games at the highest level.

Makes the winter pass more quickly.

Bright and Sunny...

and cold, naturally. The early-morning weatherman explained, because of the continuous snow pack over our region, we'll be having below average temps into the forseeable future, going so far as to predict no problems w/melting ice sculptures this year at the St. Paul Winter Carnival, which culminates with the Torchlight Parade on February 5.

The anchorman checked him on the prediction, as usually, they're not willing to forecast that far out...

Below average in the coming days, though. He was pretty sure of it.

Some people see thru the eyes of the old...

before they ever get a look at the young.
...

Spent some time in the car this afternoon and early evening. It's nice, radio -- classic rock station, mixing up songs with memories.

The first time I heard this one -- at home, alone, a rarity -- when it came on the AM station on the radio sitting on the fridge, wow... it's only Billy Joel, but I like it.

Yes I do.

A Heart for Dick.

Would you sign the back of your license, permitting doctors to harvest your organs in the case of sudden death for waiting needy recipients... if there was a chance your personal benevolence would keep Dick Cheney here on earth a minute longer than necessary?

Not me.

I'm not wishing the man dead or anything, but he really should have taken better care of himself, and shouldn't go putting himself on any lists that might take a chance away from a ... more innocent recipient, one who hasn't already shown his contempt for human life.

Long term planning -- a quality sustainable lifestyle -- usually means you avoid the stresses, riches, hatred of others that the Cheney's have trafficked in. For me, not for thee. Let time and nature take it's course, Dick... you've lived a full life.

"Is there a place...
for the hopeless sinner?
Who has ... hurt all mankind,
just to ... save his own?*

Believe Me: One Love...
(what about the One Heart?)
One Heart...
Let's get together and feel alright.
Give thanks and praise to the Lord
and I will feel alright.

* Maybe Dick and Ariel Sharon can compete in the "Only the Good Die Young" reality competition? Not pretty sure -- their aging and dying -- but think of all the lifeless young people who never got their chance to live before the policies of these men doomed them to an early death....

Sarah and Todd wannabe's.

Here.

(I'm holding out for the fishing and snowmobile "reality" videos myself. It's great for folks to become acquainted with the great outdoors in mid life though. Especially the East Coasters, I think, where playing outside and getting dirty as a kid seems to get in the way of organizational success... Only when you've secured your position on that gravy train, it seems, do you get to do the childlike things... too bad the kids are grown already, and were raised with those inside values that so often trip you up later in life...)

Speaking of,
how does retroactively enforcing a civility code -- isn't that what's being done here? -- against a man who did not make policy (thank the Clinton-era Dems for that) and yet managed to make the best of a bad situation (yep, we got gays on board, nope you can't ask/talk about it...) in a humorous way, gaining the respect of his crew, and getting the job done ... who is helped by kicking this man out for PC reasons now? Surely not the country.

It's one thing to equalize our employment and marital laws, so that heterosexual divorcees and the multi-married don't get the entitlement benefits for nothing. For being special, straight and all. It's one thing to permit workers to get the job done, and not have to pretend or hide personal characteristics that others might deem immoral or undesirable to be around. Suck it up.

It's another thing to pretend, 4 years after the fact, that, "people were offended" and "we can't let our (presumably weak) see humor like this!" nevermind that, for better or worse, you see the gay jokes on everything from Jon Stewart, to SNL.

Truth be told: if we treated our gay and straight citizens the same, measuring them by their personal committments, family stability and ability to compete effectively in the unentitled workplace -- no special points for women, gays, or disabled, just honest equal opportunities -- we'd have a big shakeup in the merit classes.

It's much easier to be benevolent, distributing "rights" as sugary sprinkles on a dessert treat, than to be honest and admit that the system as it is, the legalized discrimination that permits multiple marraiges/divorces/out-of-wedlock births as legalized family groupings: "One Man. One woman. One woman. One woman..." until they finally get it right, skews the stats.

Stats matter, but are easily manipulated. Multiple abortions by some women skews the stats to tell us that one of 3, or one of 5, American women will choose to kill off their developing life, before it can grow to viability or full term. Nope, thankfully. And as you travel into more and more of the states where life is still respected, and not commodified down to it's present market value, you see good healthy lifestyles while so many of society's "successful" (see Pete Orswag) screw up, again and again, take their legal "rewards" for the slipups, and then when they still can't stand on their own two feet, well that's when you get mandates forcing other people who have lived and stand by their own personal choices, to cover you. No thanks.

You can imitate a lifestyle, but you can't erase your past. And everyone watching -- those raised when critical thinking skills were considered more important than PC thinking -- wonders when the slipups will finally take you down. As the Boomers age, and their entitlement mentality proves unsustainable, it will be fun, I think, to watch them fall.

Buttercup squash, and wild rice.

Buttercup squash, and wild rice, on the menu tonight.
Winter food. (Use your imagination?)

Rice Lake at New Richmond on the radio, with the Warriors up 1-0 on the powerplay after the first period.

That's all I have tonight... carry on.

Balancing out nicely.

1-3-2011. Monday even.

For the record,
I was being earnest, not snarky, yesterday. Bet you could see that though.

Small but unbeaten...

What's not to like? The NY Times gives us a neutral view of yesterday's game, for those interested enough, like me, but not devoting time yesterday to watching:

With Texas Christian facing Wisconsin in this year’s game, college football’s most historic backdrop also proved a fitting one. The Horned Frogs of the Mountain West Conference are considered interlopers; the traditionalists, commissioners and bowl executives certainly would have preferred Stanford of the Pacific-10 playing in the Rose Bowl.

But with a 21-19 victory over No. 4 Wisconsin of the Big Ten, No. 3 T.C.U. solidified its standing as one of college football’s elite programs and left observers wondering how it would have stacked up against No. 1 Auburn or No. 2 Oregon in the Bowl Championship Series title game. Saturday’s victory capped a 13-0 season for the Horned Frogs and a train wreck of a day for the Big Ten. The league lost its five bowl games by a combined score of 204-102 and left the Ohio State president, E. Gordon Gee, open for mockery.

In November, Gee had chided T.C.U. and Boise State, who play outside college football’s six power conferences, for padding their records against opponents like the “Little Sisters of the Poor.”

Reached on his cellphone Saturday night, Gee said: “I’m going to New Orleans tomorrow, and Antoine’s is a great restaurant. I think they serve crow, and I’ll be eating my portion of that. T.C.U. played a great game, and they deserved to be recognized for that. Obviously, T.C.U. is a great ball team.”

T.C.U. Coach Gary Patterson resisted the opportunity to criticize Gee, saying: “I don’t have any messages for him. I make mistakes every day.”

His Horned Frogs did not make many, as the team with the country’s top-ranked defense showed it could neutralize Wisconsin’s size with speed and versatility. T.C.U. became the third program from outside the six power conferences to win a B.C.S. game, joining Utah and Boise State. It is also the first team from outside the power leagues to win the Rose Bowl since Columbia beat Stanford, 7-0, in 1934.

“Today we played for us and everyone else out there who wanted a chance,” Patterson said.

The Horned Frogs sealed the victory, fittingly, with one last defensive stand. After Wisconsin pulled to 2 points behind with two minutes remaining on a 4-yard touchdown run by Montee Ball, T.C.U.’s Tank Carder made the game’s defining play.

The Badgers inexplicably went to a shotgun formation for the 2-point conversion, and quarterback Scott Tolzien had tight end Jacob Pedersen open a step over the goal line. But Carder, who was stymied on his blitz attempt, leapt and knocked down the ball to seal the preserve T.C.U.’s lead.

“I just jumped up and swatted it away,” he said. “I can’t even explain it. It feels so good.”

One down.

364 to go...

Kidding. Like those folks who X off their calendar days. Not for me. Get your work done, sure. (And yesterday was productive here, a good start on many fronts.)

I'm also resolving to invest in a new camera. Simple shots are so much easier to capture a day's mood. For example,

Right now, I'm eating out the freezer. Starting with the strawberries, and cranberries -- fruity, non-alcoholic drinks. Broccoli, from that never-ending summer crop, and beans are defrosting. For dinner, not drinks.

(But wouldn't that have been better with a simple red-and-green picture?)



Happy 1- 2- 2011 ! Make the most of it, eh?
(We're number two. We try harder.)