Sure is beautiful here in Guatemala today. The kids are out in the pool, splashing their grandparents and enjoying themselves immensely. So I decided to make myself scarce for a moment to give them all some time alone and what better way to occupy myself than sharing some of my newly learned lessons.

*Waking children up at 4:00 a.m. to go to the airport is an exercise fraught with hazard.

*Thanks to the nice Transportation Security Agency lady I now know that when zipping the suitcase closed, do it in such a way that the zipper pulls are as far from the handle as you can possibly place them. This deters thieves in the baggage handling area from doing a quick unzip and stick hand in move. She explained that if they have to search for the zippers, they are more likely to just move on the next bag. Now that the bags have to be unlocked, this is just damn good advice. I think of it as a reward for being nice to people and chatting. I bet a lot of people don't chat with this lady and therefore don't get this safety tip.

*There was an adhesive fake fly on the urinal wall in JFK, Terminal 4. I read that a Dutch company (and I read this years ago but I think it was in the NY Times) figured out that if you put the fly there, guys will aim at it and thus the amount of spillage on the floor is reduced by some percentage. As I perversely refused to pee on the fly today, I learned that I would have hated to be the guy responsible for measuring the amount of urine on the floor of the un-flied urinal v. the flied urinal. Some jobs, I realized, I would not be happy having.

*Finally, it's really kind of fun typing on a Norwegian keyboard. It has all these cool letters built right in: Ø; Æ; and, Å. That said, the Norwegian spell check will not be very helpful in checking this post. Win some, lose some.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 06:28 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 2 kb.

I've never really thought that my daughter was given to melodrama, but last night we had the following conversation after I put her to bed, late, and after I had read her three, long stories.

GC: Pappa, nothing in my life is going right!

Me: [actually a little alarmed to hear a 4 year old say that] Why do you say that, Peanut?

GC: Because I never get to have 4 stories!

Oh, the humanity!

Posted by: Random Penseur at 12:22 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 75 words, total size 1 kb.

1 My niece has mastered the heaving sigh and dramatic declaration. Last time it was a "I don't know if I'll ever get over this!"..."this" being that I wasn't making her little brother share his new birthday present with her ten minutes after he opened it. So, did GC get the fourth story?

Posted by: nic at May 04, 2005 05:32 PM (Sx8zO)

2 Heh. Just wait for the melodramatic "I didn't ASK to be born!" Ooh, I just came up with an answer: "Yes, you did. You just don't remember things from when you were that young."

Posted by: Tuning Spork at May 04, 2005 10:52 PM (CsMXV)

3 Please tell me she did the broken wrist over the forehead thing. *giggles* My favorite story is when my eldest (now 17) was just a wee lad -- around the same age -- and he was getting weary of the younger brother following him around doing everything he did. He said: "Ryan's getting on my nervous." To this day, when we're annoyed we say, "___ is on my nervous."

Posted by: Margi at May 05, 2005 01:10 AM (lWAiX)

4 She's so cute. She also needs to pace herself-at this point, the college years alone are going to be worthy of meoldrama and theatrics!

Posted by: Helen at May 05, 2005 02:18 AM (AabhR)

5 Oh, the humanity indeed. How *could* you deprive her of what is rightfully hers? A fourth story. Is that so much to ask?? As for the melodrama, she needs to learn that the definition of the words 'judicious use' goes hand in hand with the melodrama learning curve. Otherwise, it loses its impact rather quickly. Get right on that, ok? :-)

Posted by: Jennifer at May 06, 2005 10:54 AM (jl9h0)

6 Wonderful! Absolutely wonderful! Will she grow up to be an actress, do you think?

Posted by: Hannah at May 07, 2005 01:47 PM (0d7ig)

7 Oh, can I relate to this bedtime ritual of being begged, plead to, promised the moon, and cajoled into more stories, only to have my "sorry..." met with total melodrama on any given night. My work around is reading a chapter in a book, like Alice in Wonderland, that will hold his imagination for that night. I was truly surprised to discover he not only follows the story line from night to night but he remembers all the characters and all the major story points.

Posted by: michele at May 10, 2005 12:53 PM (ht2RK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

This is shaping up to be a very bad year, demands of practice wise. This week alone:

*I am preparing a major adversary proceeding complaint arising out of a bankruptcy as special counsel to the trustee in bankruptcy;

*I have been approached by another lawyer, a friend from the train, who wants to refer me a potentially huge case involving really arcane issues of property law -- she said, and I thought this was nice, that she's tried to explain this case to three or four other lawyers and so far I'm the only one who has been able to follow the bouncing ball; and,

*I believe that I will be retained today in a piece of international litigation that will make every other case I've ever worked on in my whole life look like a rounding error and has the potential to consume me like a monster.

The rest of the year is suddenly looking like it's going to be exceptionally busy.

Oh, and I'm supposed to go to Guatemala again tomorrow on the dawn patrol flight for the weekend. Expect blogging to go real light for the next couple of days.

And now if you'll excuse me, I have to go call some economists. I also need to consider having my head examined.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 09:37 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 223 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Is there any chance you can tell us why you are calling economists? I have a certain interest in that area, and it would be interesting to see how your world and theirs overlap. Also, thanks for all the London Architecture photos. They are beautiful.

Posted by: tex ritter at May 04, 2005 12:59 PM (YtqTh)

2 Well, sounds crazy...but better than the alternative, I'm guessing!

Posted by: Kelly at May 04, 2005 04:17 PM (KcwX7)

3 Oh, yeah, much better than the alternative. It's been dead at work for almost a month now. Hey, customers, where IS everybody?!

Posted by: Tuning Spork at May 04, 2005 10:59 PM (CsMXV)

4 The best way to slog through a mountain of tasks? One. Thing. At. A time. (Oh, and a really great support staff. LOLL! You knew I was going to go there, dincha?! : wink If you need any assistance (and I can be of any) please don't hesitate to holla! xoxo

Posted by: Margi at May 05, 2005 01:13 AM (lWAiX)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

So, there I was, sweating away this morning in the gym and half-listening to CNN when they did a really interesting interview with an automotive industry analyst who was brought on to talk about the stark drop off in sales at General Motors. She was quite good, actually, explaining that what has the Street so freaked out is that the drop in sales was mostly in the SUV market, where GM makes all their money. If Americans are not buying the big Suburbans than GM ain't making no money, Well, she said it better. Then she was asked about whether union deals were hurting GM and whether GM was really spending too much on healthcare.

And this is where it got interesting for me. The analyst said that $1200 out of every car sold is used to pay for health care costs. Ok, well, that seems like a lot but I have no way of knowing. How do I put that in context? How many workers does that $1200 pay for? How many retirees? How many families? In short, how many people are covered by that?

Well, she went on to put in context for me. And this is what I mean when I say that it's all in the way you tell it, all in the way you present information. Telling me $1200 per car really tells me nothing. But tell me:

General Motors spent more on health care last year than they did on steel

and you've smacked me upside the head and caught my attention. She felt that for a manufacturing company, this wasn't very good.

Can you imagine that? Is GM a manufacturing company or a social welfare state? Let's see if we can figure that out a little.

GM, according to their annual report for 2004, had net sales and revenue of $193.5 billion. GM seems to divide themselves into auto making and finance/insurance divisions for revenue purposes. That's our first hint that GM may not be just a manufacturing company -- they have a f/i division big enough to warrant a separate discussion in the annual report. Automotive still is the biggest, earning $161.5 billion of the $193.5 and f/i earning some $32 billion. But I do note that only f/i earned a profit -- some $2.9 billion. Unfortunately, I lack the time to probe further and I cannot seem to isolate how much GM spent on steel last year or even what the costs were associated with the automotive divisions. Not a shock, really, when you're dealing with a company that size.

But still, more on health care than on steel. Stunning, isn't it?

Posted by: Random Penseur at 09:27 AM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 457 words, total size 2 kb.

QRed was kind enough to email me one of his recent compositions: "Fuck with QRed". It's off his most recent album, 'Survivor Series', out now on Progenitor Inc., done with him and Hos, his deejay. QRed describes his song as a "straight up battle tune". I describe it as hot, with rousing beats, big old bass and drum line, and excellent lyrics. It's got something to it, something I am having problems articulating here but it sort of reminded me of some of the tunes from Apache Indian, like "Make Way for the Indian", if you can remember that song.

In any event, I liked the tune very much and, on that basis, would absolutely recommend the album. I'll get back to you if QRed gives me touring dates and information.

For further information, I direct you to QRed's websites: DRMSolutions and LifePlusRecordings.

Cheers, QRed and thanks for the tracks!

Posted by: Random Penseur at 12:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 158 words, total size 1 kb.

I came across, in my wanderings, the following extract which I copied and pasted from I don't recall where but which inspired me to do another Behind the Curtain post:

In 1924, a Scottish conman by the name of Arthur Ferguson succeeded in extracting from a wealthy American businessman a down payment of £6,000 on Nelson's Column. Ferguson had met his victim in Trafalgar Square and convinced him that it was being sold to reduce the national debt and that he was the estate agent charged with effecting the top-secret sale. Emboldened by his crime, Ferguson went on to con other tourists out of a £1,000 downpayment on Big Ben and a £2,000 deposit for Buckingham Palace, before heading for America, where he was caught trying to sell the Statue of Liberty to an Australian tourist.

The information on Ferguson is scant, unfortunately. In fact, I suppose I can't really do a Behind the Curtain Post for him considering the paucity of material.

I found this as an aside in an essay about another conman, although it appears to have been cribbed without attribution from the FreeDictionary:

It finally dawned on Ferguson that America was indeed the land of opportunity, and so he emigrated there in 1925. He sold the White House to a rancher on the installment plan for yearly payments of $100,000 USD, and tried to sell the Statue of Liberty to a visiting Australian, who went to the police. The authorities had been looking for the mysterious salesman of public landmarks, and Ferguson went to jail, to be released in 1930. He profitably continued his trade in Los Angeles until his death in 1938.

Even if this is not really a Behind the Curtain post, I don't know what else to call it and I would have really enjoyed meeting this fellow. Although I'd have left my wallet at home.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 11:37 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 323 words, total size 2 kb.

One wonderful thing about London is the many arcades. The shopping arcade is, as you might guess from the name, a series of arches, roofed, with shops in the spaces between the arches. In many ways, they were the first shopping malls, providing covered spaces for upscale merchants to appeal to the monied classes. Here are some of my favorites. They are glorious looking spaces. We'll start with the more obscure Albermarle Arcade:

Another arcade, off Piccadilly:

And, finally, the Burlington Arcade front facade:

And a close up:

These were the height of fashion when they were built. The first shopping malls in London!

Posted by: Random Penseur at 11:06 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 108 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Beautiful. Thanks.

Posted by: Angie at May 03, 2005 06:49 PM (FlWAT)

2 The orange makes me giddy! Beautiful photos. I can never shop at Rockingham Mall again, let alone that dreadful clump of concrete boxes in Newington, NH. I wish there were more beautiful public buildings here.

Posted by: Amy at May 04, 2005 08:59 AM (nUCsP)

3 Yes, why is architecture so.... ugh! these days, er.. years? More stone! More marble! More sculpture! Quaint coloring! Architects want to look cutting edge; futuristic. Funk that!

Posted by: Tuning Spork at May 04, 2005 11:21 PM (CsMXV)

4 RP - Do you know about this? http://www.pinholeday.org/org/

Posted by: Mark at May 07, 2005 11:07 PM (xccFI)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

I saw one of the following signs, read about the second one, and was sent the third by a friend from New Orleans. The creativity that goes into these things is quite something.

The First Sign. Spotted while driving in the Bronx yesterday right next to Yankee Stadium, stopped in traffic:

Why Lie?
I Want A Beer!

And yes, people were indeed giving the thirsty guy money.

Second Sign. Read about this morning in the Metropolitan Diary:

Ninjas killed my family. Need money for kung fu lessons.

No word on whether he was getting any closer to his revenge.

Finally, a picture sent to me by a buddy who was in New Orleans and came across this fellow with this sign:

Posted by: Random Penseur at 09:08 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 129 words, total size 1 kb.

Today's lesson of how to deal with a troll is brought to you courtesy of Linda, who demonstrates the proper way to heat the poker before applying it to the troll. It was a thing of beauty. And remember, a thing of beauty is a joy forever!

Posted by: Random Penseur at 12:10 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 63 words, total size 1 kb.

Today's architectural element picture from London are these beautiful Georgian lights. Note the cones hanging off of them, they were used to extinguish the torches needed to light the lamps.

Let's also throw in a Georgian fan light window to go along with it:

Posted by: Random Penseur at 12:05 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 48 words, total size 1 kb.

1 I love your architectural photos!

Posted by: Mark at May 01, 2005 01:50 PM (6zB+8)

2 Beautiful!

Posted by: Hannah at May 02, 2005 05:56 AM (zr6mn)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Lord NelsonThe Duke of York*, from behind, in the morning fog:

I don't know why, precisely, but I think that there really is something about this picture. Maybe the contrast between the very red bus and the the very grey day.

Thanks to Jinn&Tonic for the correction! My bad!

Posted by: Random Penseur at 07:11 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 61 words, total size 1 kb.

Another picture from London, since I will be delayed at home this morning waiting for a moving company to come tell me how much it will cost to break all my china. This is my picture of the inside of the new dome at the British Museum:

Posted by: Random Penseur at 06:12 AM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 53 words, total size 1 kb.

Since the Scream and the Madonna were stolen, I have maintained the hope that they would be returned, unharmed. That may have been foolish. According to Aftenposten today:

The Munch masterpieces "The Scream" and "Madonna" have been incinerated, according to newspaper Dagbladet, citing criminal sources and a top secret police report.

The paper claimed Thursday that the paintings were destroyed in order to get rid of damning evidence as the police investigation closes in on the culprits behind the robbery.

Investigation leader Iver Stensrud of the Oslo police said he had no knowledge of the supposedly secret report acknowledging the destruction of the paintings.

"This is completely unknown to Oslo police. I basically have no comment and normally we do not use Dagbladet as a reliable source here at the Oslo police," Stensrud told NRK (Norwegian Broadcasting).

Three people are in custody in connection with the Munch robbery, but none of them are linked to crime via technical evidence, and the pair that carried out the heist are considered to be at large.

Dagbladet cited both criminal and police sources in their reportage, and said that police expect new arrests in the case shortly.

In any event, prepare for the worst.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 11:20 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 211 words, total size 1 kb.

I'm off to the doctor this morning, so, while I'm gone, I leave you this picture I took in London (I'm finally going to get around to posting some of these):

Posted by: Random Penseur at 06:57 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 37 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Nice pic. They'd be more impressive if their hats were symmetric. You know, the guy on the left needs to even out the top of his and pull it down a bit to match the guy on the right. Not that I have OCD or anything.

Posted by: Kelly at April 28, 2005 09:42 AM (eFgv+)

2 yes, they could take lessons from the Rockettes.

Posted by: GrammarQueen at April 28, 2005 10:28 AM (glf8i)

3 If the guy on the right pulls his down any further it won't be a hat - it'll be a peter heater!

Posted by: Mark at April 29, 2005 02:51 PM (unQ25)

4 My mother, may she rest in peace, came to England to visit me. I took her down to London and she got up one morning to go see the changing of the guard. She got so wrapped up taking pictures as the troop marched back to the barracks . . . she kept walking and taking pictures that she ended up in their compound. (This was a couple of decades before security concerns would have prevented it.) She said they were quite nice to her and chatted to her as one of them gently took her by the elbow and guided her out of the compound and back onto the street. You had to know my mother (think Doris Roberts) to understand that this was not an entirely unusual event for her . . . but one I always think of when I think back on here. :-) Oh, and nice photo!

Posted by: Ivan at April 29, 2005 10:46 PM (Nny4f)

5 Thanks for the story, Ivan. It was a good one! Mark, you need to get out more often.

Posted by: RP at April 30, 2005 07:08 AM (X3Lfs)

6 "Mark, you need to get out more often. " Fear of this is precisely what has the local constabulary on edge.

Posted by: Mark at April 30, 2005 05:38 PM (vPa51)

7 And I thought their uniforms were red. Nice pic; can they really see anything?

Posted by: Rachel Ann at May 01, 2005 04:13 AM (fo9pg)

8 Rachel Ann - It could well be that the uniforms above belong to a different regiment than we ordinarily see - It is, apparently, not always the same regiment that guards BP and the royal family. http://www.changing-the-guard.com/history.htm

Posted by: Mark at May 01, 2005 11:51 AM (6zB+8)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Today you get the collection of random thoughts that are scrambling around in my brain, fighting for attention, hoping that I'll notice them enough to let them out. I do these posts every once in a while, you may recall.

*What the heck is everyone so upset about John Bolton for? What does it matter if he is difficult or rude? How can that possibly be the issue holding up his confirmation? As the Democrats trot out every fruit cake who ever came into contact with Bolton, I can only think that this process, this trivialization of the confirmation process, can only end in scaring more people away from serving their country until we end up with those the Anti-Federalists feared the most: those who seek office and power for their own ends and not because it is good and right to serve your country.

*Sometimes, hours after you have exercised, you feel as if you could float down the hallway on legs rendered postively gossamer as a result of the blood flow.

*An important lesson learned: never challenge a Navy man on the topic of breasts. If you don't understand, feel free to ask Jim and he'll explain it to you like he did me.

*I have been toying with the idea of what I would do if I didn't have to work for a living anymore. Would I still work? Would I get a useless graduate degree? Travel without end? Or would I just continue to work anyway because my whole being and imagination, much like a tree tied down to a fence, has become so warped by years of work that too much of my self image and self esteem is wrapped up in professional identity and accomplishments? Or, finally, would it just send a bad message to the children if I just upped and quit? Note: this thought is entirely theoretical. There has been no lottery won, no inheritance gained, no huge damage award procured.

*I received a gift this morning from the locker room attendant at the gym. He's a nice guy and we chat from time to time. I suspect that maybe not everyone chats with him. Anyway, we got into a friendly argument about Rum. He's from Barbados and I was, to his mind, foolishly extolling the virtues of Guatemalan Rum which is this truly excellent stuff that you drink like a brandy, in snifters or at least without a mixer. He disagreed, being from Barbados. This morning he gave me a bottle of Mount Gay Extra Old Barbados Rum, described on the Mount Gay website as:

EXTRA OLD, in its category, is the reference of the rum world. It is a masterful blend of the finest, aged spirits, selected attentively amongst the oldest reserves with a resulting maturity of 17 years. The force of its oak aromas is softened by its sweet, fruity notes, reminiscent of pastry and bananas. Easily identified thanks to its traditional label and its malt whisky type bottle, its magnificent luminosity, dark amber colour and extreme clarity are the key qualities of this rum. The result of many years of meticulous development, EXTRA OLD has received several Grand Gold Medals and Trophies from the highly respected International Institute for Quality competition.

I am excited to crack it open and very grateful for the gift. I'm going to get him some of the Guatemalan Rum to try.

*I am watching a not for profit I am involved with gear up for a messy internal fight. There are two boards, I serve on one of them as an officer. I just had an hour long discussion with the President of my Board, the upshot of which is that the other board may discover that they have bitten off more than they can chew on this one. I think it will be disconcerting for them to discover that we have formulated our own agenda, our own set of aims, and backed it up with advice from counsel and from an accountant. Yup, gonna be an interesting Summer for sure.

*[WARNING: SAD] Don't read the thought I put in Extended Entry unless you think today you can handle pain/sadness. Just skip it if you are feeling raw today.
more...

Posted by: Random Penseur at 11:21 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 897 words, total size 5 kb.

According to this article in the Daily Telegraph, it's Les Belges! The Belgian spies are no longer to be trusted with guns. That's right, no one is allowed to have a gun any longer:

The battered reputation of Belgium's security forces took a new hit yesterday with the revelation that its internal spy service has disarmed almost all its field agents after one drunkenly tried to shoot a colleague in the head.

The civilian agents of the Sûreté de l'Etat, the equivalent of Britain's MI5, are already among the most powerless intelligence operatives in the Western world, with no right even to tap telephones.

Now, they have had their handguns confiscated on the orders of their general administrator, Koen Dassen, a Belgian newspaper reported. A working group has been established to work out who is armed and why, after Mr Dassen realised that controls were "worse than approximate".

Saar Vanderplaetsen, the chief spokesman for Laurette Onkelinx, the justice minister, confirmed that Sûreté agents had had to hand in their weapons, pending new rules and regulations.

She was unable to confirm reports that officers had gone on a virtual work-to-rule since being disarmed, including avoidance of risky missions. The exact numbers and missions of Sûreté agents are kept confidential.

Miss Vanderplaetsen said: "For the moment, everybody has had to hand in their guns because we had this incident, in October or November last year, during which an agent shot at another."

Mrs Onkelinx was reportedly distressed that she only learnt of the incident, in which no one was hurt, from the press four months after it took place in Brussels.

The agent suspected of firing his gun in the general direction of his colleague's head was said by the media to be an alcoholic with a dependency on anti-depressants.

Belgium's internal security arrangements have proved a source of frustration for their Western counterparts.

Lax passport security helped Tunisian militants based in Brussels to supply fake Belgian passports to the men who killed Ahmed Shah Massoud, the Afghan commander and enemy of the Taliban, in 2001.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 10:06 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 360 words, total size 2 kb.

Mark asked for an update on the house and, since I am particularly pissed off by the whole situation, I decided to write an update in the hopes that it might calm me down. Here's where things lie: I have tendered a contract to my Sellers and my Buyers have tendered a contract to me. My Sellers have not signed my contract and, thus, I have not signed my Buyers' contract. You can see why, right? If I sign my Buyers' contract to buy my house and my Sellers don't sign, I am bound to sell my house with no place to move to. My Buyers are getting antsy. So, I picked up the phone to explain the situation to them, to cut out all the middle men (the brokers and attorneys) so as to avoid diffusion of communication. Turns out the guy is a bond trader. *sigh* That means he has the professional time horizon of a day. Tops. I was told by him that he had received legal advise to withdraw his offer. Untrue according to my attorney who spoke to his attorney. Whatever. Buyer then told me that he would stand on his offer until close of business today and then re-evaluate. I said, fine, and thanked him for his courtesy.

I then heard from my lawyer that end of business means 4:00 and that "re-evaluate" means withdraw their offer.

Ok. So I email my attorney in CT and tell him that if the Sellers don't sign my contract and return it to me by 3:00 today my offer is withdrawn. As I said to my attorney, I cannot be in the position of my deal in NY falling through at the same time that I am bound to purchase this house in CT. That is a non-starter.

So now we wait while the clock ticks.

Did I mention that I am pissed? I now intend to be a prick with respect to the closing on my house, assuming that the deal goes through. What does that mean? No courtesy whatsoever shall be granted to the Buyers. No explanation that certain pipes might be adversely effected by low temperatures, despite all appearances to the contrary. No extra lightbulbs left for light fixtures we can't use anymore. I'll chuck 'em instead. I will not share any information whatsoever with respect to the house that I am not contractually required to share and that covers a multitude of topics. And that bottle of Champagne that we would usually leave for the new owners? Ain't happening. That will go to my attorney, instead.

UPDATE:

My Sellers have returned their signed contracts. I guess the deal is going through, after all.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 09:01 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 460 words, total size 2 kb.

I got nothing, today. No topics I feel moved to write about today, although I was interested in writing about them before today. That's ok, they'll keep. I think what it is, you see, is a case of the Spring blahs. They happen to everyone, I believe. Today is my turn. So, here's what I'm going to do. If you feel motivated enough yourself to care, I will give you the two topics I was thinking about writing a little something about and let you decide what you feel like reading about.

Topic 1: Jewish holiday of Passover.

Topic 2: The power of a Court to make someone stop uttering defamatory statements.

Like I said, not much, but I'll let you vote.

Believe me, you'd rather hear about this than have me whine about coordinating the almost simultaneous sale/purchase of our old/new houses.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 03:34 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 149 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Bring on the GC, she's always good to raise the spirits!

Posted by: Mia at April 25, 2005 06:18 PM (0nZU5)

2 I vote for option #1.

Posted by: Angie at April 25, 2005 07:34 PM (FlWAT)

3 I'd rather hear about the new house. What's it like?

Posted by: Mark at April 25, 2005 11:07 PM (IWblo)

4 How exactly do you get someone to stop uttering defamatory statements? Duct tape?

Posted by: Kathy at April 26, 2005 12:47 AM (RFVZA)

5 RP, I am reminded of that delightful SNL skit (Coffee Tawk?), where our "hostess" would provide topics and an exhortation to engage in conversation about them. For instance: "The New Deal was neither new nor a deal; discuss". Hope your day gets better!

Posted by: GrammarQueen at April 26, 2005 09:53 AM (kqNmk)

6 Power of the court! Maybe it will work with bickering children too?

Posted by: Laurel at April 26, 2005 03:26 PM (B9oew)

7 Passover, please!!

Posted by: azalea at April 26, 2005 03:34 PM (hRxUm)

8 Not being Jewish, I can't comment on the 1st. Not being an attorney I can't comment on the 2nd. However, that will not stop me from wishing you a blessed and peaceful holiday. May the gathering of your loved ones be special.

Posted by: michele at April 26, 2005 08:51 PM (ht2RK)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

[UPDATE] I'm sticky posting this at the top for a week or so as answers seem to be still trickling in. [/UPDATE]

Mia had an excellent idea which I am borrowing from for here and which she took from fellow Munuvian, Eric. She asked:

A while ago Eric at SWG asked his readers if they would leave a comment after a post to say if they were lurkers and/or bloggers themselves and he was surprised by the amount of comments he received. I like that idea because that would mean if they had sites themselves I could have the chance to go read what they were all about and I'd not feel so vulnerable as I do sometimes (when I see from my stats that someone has spent the last 3 hours reading my archives). So ....... if you have a moment, drop me a comment and perhaps tell me who you are? Lurker, commenter or blogger . Thank you.

I'm not feeling vulnerable, particularly, but I am curious. I figure that in a normal day, fewer than 5% of visitors as counted on my statmeter actually leave a comment. So, like Mia, I'm wondering about my visitors. Are you lurkers? Casual visitors? Google search visitors who, having found what they are looking for simply read and move on? Regular readers? Or just a good buddy (and you know who you are and I do, too) stopping by to see what's up?

Please do leave a comment and say, hello. At least that way I can get some sense as to who is reading, if anyone.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 08:27 AM | Comments (54) | Add Comment
Post contains 288 words, total size 2 kb.

1 I'm one of your daily readers and I'm a blogger and sometimes commenter .... How did I come across you in the first place, via Helen I suspect.

Posted by: Mia at April 12, 2005 08:49 AM (9pD0b)

2 i'm a lurker! found you through buffalo wings & vodka.

Posted by: emily at April 12, 2005 10:08 AM (tV1Fh)

3 I'm a blogger too. I actually found you through an ocomment you left on a guys blog. He was/is going through separation/divorce and you left him some very good advice... Glad I found you!

Posted by: Wicked H at April 12, 2005 10:19 AM (iqFar)

4 fellow munuvian who (very) occasionally leaves a comment

Posted by: Ted at April 12, 2005 10:33 AM (blNMI)

5 Casual lurker here - you're a daily read for me, but I don't always have something to say back!

Posted by: GrammarQueen at April 12, 2005 11:43 AM (glf8i)

6 Regular reader; occasional commenter!

Posted by: nic at April 12, 2005 11:58 AM (JijW0)

7 lurker here. Found you on Amber's blog. No blog of my own, just a reader of others.

Posted by: jules at April 12, 2005 12:36 PM (AX+fr)

8 Recently a regular reader. Found you through Irish Elk when Mark posted something nice about both of our blogs at once.

Posted by: Amy at April 12, 2005 12:44 PM (nUCsP)

9 Unabashed Fangrrrl. Found you in the Munuvian Secret Induction Society and would read you if you posted your grocery list. *sheepish grin*

Posted by: Margi at April 12, 2005 01:55 PM (lWAiX)

10 I'm a lurker! I like the sound of that for some reason. I enjoy your blog daily but I'm afraid I cannot remember where I found you.

Posted by: laurel at April 12, 2005 02:38 PM (B9oew)

11 Regular daily reader. No blog of my own. I think I heard about your site from Amber. Damn, I miss her.

Posted by: Azalea at April 12, 2005 03:02 PM (hRxUm)

12 I'm a regular reader and a blogger, and I found my way here from Mia's site actually.

Posted by: Stereotype at April 12, 2005 03:10 PM (SPSLQ)

13 :waves: You already know who I am.

Posted by: Hannah at April 12, 2005 03:21 PM (0d7ig)

14 Hey fella, I am a sometime commenter, though I seem to compose responses to many of the things you write about in my head (probably proof that I am a loony). I found you through Critical Mass.

Posted by: Mandalei at April 12, 2005 03:28 PM (vUO1j)

15 Lurker, I guess, and an occasional commenter. Oh, and a one-time emailer.

Posted by: d at April 12, 2005 03:32 PM (8MmTs)

16 Fairly regular commenter, emailer and debate starter (or sh!t disturber if you want) I read your site everyday, I think I got here through a comment you posted on my blog, but I'm not entirely sure. Always amused and delighted by the GC and BC stories.

Posted by: Oorgo at April 12, 2005 07:58 PM (lM0qs)

17 I read. I blog. Oh, and sometimes comment.

Posted by: Simon at April 12, 2005 09:13 PM (OyeEA)

18 I'm a day or so late and a dollar or two short to the party. Nothing new there. But plenty new here. I found you through your finding me. And leaving lovely comments in your wake, for which I thank you. I'm looking forward to reading more, and soon.

Posted by: Jennifer at April 12, 2005 09:37 PM (MbhV6)

19 i am one of your fellow munuvians. (Gee? Ya think ) I pop over generally when I see a fresh piece o' cake next to your blog's name on my blogroll.

Posted by: Kathy at April 12, 2005 11:03 PM (RFVZA)

20 I am a daily reader and lurker who keeps coming back to hear your GC stories. I believe I came here after you made an astute comment on making light, but my memory on that is fuzzy.

Posted by: Terri at April 13, 2005 12:20 AM (SIz+V)

21 Thank you all, very much, for your comments. Some of you are well known to me but I appreciate just the same your taking the trouble to leave a comment. But many of you are new and I really am very glad to meet you. Thanks again, y'all!

Posted by: RP at April 13, 2005 09:28 AM (LlPKh)

22 Another fellow Munuvian here. I like to stop by and see what's happening to the Girl and Boy children. They sound so delightful.

Posted by: Jordana at April 13, 2005 03:34 PM (MI1Kq)

23 I'm a daily visitor. I should probably comment more often.

Posted by: JohnL at April 13, 2005 10:06 PM (gplif)

24 Regular reader, commenter, friend, fellow traveler through this incredible journey we call life. Or, to paraphrase Meredith Brooks... I'm a bitch, I'm a blogger, I'm a child, I'm a father. I'm a joker, I am straight, I really enjoy cake! I'm your bud, I drink beer, I comment over here, And no you wouldn't want it any other way! ...or something like that.

Posted by: Jim at April 15, 2005 12:13 PM (tyQ8y)

25 Regular reader. I think we joined mu.nu about the same time and I remember you posted something about Louisiana v Mississippi drivers. I commented, you replied, and we've been commenting/replying ever since. And anyone who offers to send me BaTampte pickles is a friend for life. :-)

Posted by: Howard at April 15, 2005 05:09 PM (u2JaN)

26 regular reader, comment less frequently than i would like, found you through citical mass

Posted by: Ivan at April 15, 2005 09:35 PM (Nny4f)

27 I'm a failed blogger who reads you now and again. You have a good way with words, and tell nice stories. I came upon your blog on a link from Everyday Stranger, whom I read on a similar basis. Sorry about your aunt, the C monster has affected all of us at one time or another. Some day, explain about mu.nu. I read about munuvians, and have had several blogs switch over to it, but I know not what it is. Be of good cheer.... Tom B

Posted by: bigTom at April 17, 2005 02:28 AM (RwC3v)

28 Fellow Mu.Nu blogger and regular reader. Probably guilty of too much lurking and not enough commenting.

Posted by: Stephen Macklin at April 17, 2005 09:37 AM (U3CvV)

29 i read as often as i can. i tend to comment in spurts. my blogging is best described as.......split. i found you? or you found me? not sure. i think it was through Mick. and i like the 'sticky posting' idea, and how it was said. (and Jim - great version of that song! lol...)

Posted by: sn at April 17, 2005 01:26 PM (6FCAy)

30 Just found your site via Amber. I've been blogging for a few weeks about starting life over again after 40. All three of my readers find it very interesting. LOL I've also fought headaches for years, so I'll scan down and post about that. Take care!

Posted by: ez at April 17, 2005 02:57 PM (RD6DW)

31 Regular reader (okay, I admit, sometimes I'm lazy and just SKIM), only post sporadically. I've already forgotten how and why I stumbed onto you...whoops.

Posted by: Allison at April 17, 2005 03:12 PM (cNk3g)

32 Fellow (and very recent) MuNuvian here. I think I found your blog through a comment you left on mine. I don't remember for sure. Or maybe I found you via John at TexasBestGrok. Either way, I like your blog and writing.

Posted by: Eric at April 17, 2005 03:25 PM (ZUryZ)

33 What Stephen said.

Posted by: Tuning Spork at April 17, 2005 03:45 PM (itU4G)

34 A regular reader...I think I found you from Amber's blog. Being married to a lawyer, I relate to a lot of your writing :-)

Posted by: Jocelyn at April 17, 2005 04:35 PM (MePbh)

35 I tried to comment on this last week, but had troubles and gave up... ...so...hello! I stop by almost every day. I've only commented a couple of times. I blog sporatically. Guess I'm primarily a lurker who likes iced tea

Posted by: C at April 17, 2005 10:43 PM (5jfVj)

36 ...oops. and I found you through sn.

Posted by: C at April 17, 2005 10:44 PM (5jfVj)

37 Last May a comment you left on another blog prompted me to ask you a personal question. Your answer helped with my youngest daughter. I have been a faithful reader ever since.

Posted by: Annie at April 18, 2005 11:02 AM (y4GM5)

38 semi-lurker? Occasionaly comment, but not as often as I read.

Posted by: Rachel Ann at April 18, 2005 11:49 AM (IJkka)

39 Lurker. Blogger. And, I like to think, friend

Posted by: Helen at April 18, 2005 12:33 PM (Oxw5k)

40 I lurk. I am not creative enough to blog. I found you while lurking at Helen's...

Posted by: Kathy at April 18, 2005 02:36 PM (87x4U)

41 Hm. Interesting. I'd like to ask the same @ my blog but wonder if I'd get many responses. This is my 1st time at your blog, I followed you back via your comments at my blog.

Posted by: Kelly at April 19, 2005 11:10 AM (WLSBV)

42 Occasional reader, occasional commenter, and I started reading you when you started commenting on my gf's blog.

Posted by: Victor at April 20, 2005 09:53 AM (L3qPK)

43 Lurker, non-blogger, and sometimes (twice, I think) commenter. Found you via John Bruce's site, and I read a couple times a week.

Posted by: tex ritter at April 20, 2005 06:27 PM (tD8vq)

44 Sometimes a lurker, sometimes a bona fide visitor, sometimes a passer-by, sometimes just a transient. I do enjoy your blog and to be quite honest, I have been visiting you for a while and I know you have occasionally visited me so I've quite forgotten how we became acquainted.

Posted by: Roberta S at April 22, 2005 03:52 AM (C+5/z)

45 I stumbled in herte from a link from TexasBestGrok and I thought I would take a lok around. I've been blgging myself for about 10 months, but only recently started doing it seriously. Well, as serious as i get...

Posted by: James Wigderson at April 22, 2005 03:15 PM (+9K2s)

46 I'm a fellow blogger who found you via Kathy's blog. I really liked your idea, and have already shamelessly ripped it off... hope you don't mind! Anyway, I've only skimmed over a couple of posts so far, but I like what I've seen, so I'll come back later for some more "in-depth study."

Posted by: TeaFizz at April 23, 2005 12:43 PM (F0rK8)

47 first time here - hi

Posted by: Mish at April 23, 2005 03:11 PM (IbPy0)

48 Before 5 minutes ago I was completely unaware of your existance in the universe. i found you through Teafizz http://teafizz.blogspot.com/ I will at least lurk now...

Posted by: Tulip at April 23, 2005 07:57 PM (Jr28y)

49 I read, I rarely comment. Generally speaking, by the time I get around to reading posts, someone has said what I wanted to say MUCH better than I think I would have

Posted by: Emily at April 25, 2005 01:02 AM (CZWnO)

50 First time visitor; my blog's been up for about a year, but only blogging steadily since this January.

Posted by: Jodie at April 25, 2005 04:30 PM (cHKGi)

51 ... stopping by to visit after noticing traffic from this direction... *waves* Hi munu neighbor!

Posted by: Princess Cat at April 25, 2005 09:57 PM (K10IP)

52 Found you via TeaFizz via Blog d'Elisson. For today just a new visitor - at work right now so no time for a good read...

Posted by: Cowtown Pattie at April 28, 2005 01:19 PM (aXIPq)

53 I was looking for a tan thru swimming costume & found you!! I don't even know what blogging is but have spent a very pleasant 20 minutes here!

Posted by: Lou at May 06, 2005 08:38 AM (pIOfB)

54 First time visitor! Found you while searching for the story behind BaTampte pickles which I purchased for the first time on Tuesday.

Posted by: Summer at June 24, 2005 01:37 PM (PM+qf)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The Atlantic Monthly has embarked upon an ambitious and wonderfully conceived project to send celebrated French intellectual Bernard Henri Levy around the United States to emulate, sort of, the journey taken by my all time favorite Frenchman, Alexis de Toqueville. As I hope you already know, Toqueville was the young French nobleman who traveled across our fair land and penned the incomparable classic, Democracy in America. This book, to me, is the most important book ever written about America. I cannot praise it enough or overstate its importance. If you've never read it, well, go get a copy and check it out.

So, anyway, here's the Atlantic Monthly with this fabulous idea. The first report has just come out in the most recent issue and I rush to the news stand to buy it. I read the entire installment. Its very long. It, how shall I put this, really, really sucks.

Let me count the ways in which I was so cruelly disappointed. First, M. Levy doesn't seem to have the first clue about America. Second, his travels, like his writing (more on this in a moment) are disjointed and disorganized. He flits from place to place, never seeming to linger very long, with no apparent reason for going to a place or leaving a place. Third, some of the political biases he brings with him about America seem stuck in decades long since past. The war in Vietnam is over, Sir. I hope I am not the first one to clue you into that fact. Fourth, no one likes being condescended to. Just saying. Fifth, the writing style is suggestive of his entire approach. He writes in a staccato fashion, full of sentence fragments, as if to suggest great energy or urgency, that his observations are coming so fast and furious that it is impossible to get them down on the page fast enough before they are gone. Also, the style suggests a lack of calm reflection, a want of consideration and mulling over of the observations he purports to make. But I do think that the style of writing correctly reflects M. Levy's skimming over the surface approach.

The best part of the essay so far? The most impressive interchange? A policeman in rural West who, after stopping to tell M. Levy he needs to move along and discovers that Levy is following in Toqueville's footsteps, asks Levy if so far he feels that Toqueville's observations about America are still valid. Levy, I regret to report, writes of this encounter with wide eyed astonishment, as if to say that he is astounded to discover a cop with an education, but never gets around to furnishing an answer. I think that the police officer got the better of this exchange and I am proud to say so.

I hold out little hope for the next installment, even if I am going to read it anyway.

Posted by: Random Penseur at 10:17 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 502 words, total size 3 kb.