nancynall.com » It’s all local.

It’s all local.

You’re never too old to learn some­thing new. I man­aged to report the results of every con­tested race in the Grosse Pointes last night in a sin­gle tweet with not even a short­ened URL, and given my ten­dency to run on at the key­board, I think this shows not only admirable brevity but heroic restraint. Ahem:

Mill­ages: Passed. School board: Pang­born, Dind­of­fer, Jaku­biec. Woods judge: Metry. Park coun­cil: Arora, Grano, Rob­son. Park judge: Jar­boe.

There is no such thing as platform-neutral jour­nal­ism. That’s actu­ally 138 char­ac­ters — two to spare. Good thing the Woods judi­cial race wasn’t won by the can­di­date with the dou­ble last name.

While we’re keep­ing it brief, might as well three-dot our way into this note from J.C. that arrived last night from his vaca­tion in the Amer­i­can west, regard­ing the assas­si­na­tion of Lee Har­vey Oswald. Date­line Will­cox, Ariz.:

Actu­ally, live TV hap­pened all the time in the 1950s and 1960s. Even black and white microwave live shots date to the early 60s. But what hap­pened in the case of Oswald was that they had a pool b/w big old RCA stu­dio cam­era, a remote truck, and a hard­wired, lit­er­ally, big ol’ cabled con­nec­tion to ‘telco’–AT&T, just like for a base­ball game. Expen­sive, but to Dal­las sta­tions this was a big deal.

That video fas­ci­nates me because its so crisp and so clear in its black and white­ness and Dan Rather, Robert Mac­Neil, Bob Schi­ef­fer and so on were so young.

He’s my go-to author­ity on all tele­vi­sion mat­ters. He told me once about the day Mike Wal­lace came in to our col­lege sta­tion, WOUB, for an inter­view, back in the day when sets were two chairs in front of a lat­tice screen and a ficus tree. J.C. was run­ning one of the stu­dio cam­eras. Even then, in the mid-’70s, Wal­lace looked impos­si­bly wiz­ened and old and not at all like the “60 Min­utes” hero. Wal­lace took his seat and started direct­ing the floor direc­tor on how to adjust the lights — bring this one down, that one up, the other one around. J.C., watch­ing through the cam­era, said it was amaz­ing: “He became ‘Mike Wal­lace’ right before our eyes.” Years later, he pointed out to me how every new sea­son of “Sex and the City” took the light­ing lower and lower (on a lat­eral plane, not in inten­sity), until it seemed the gals were liv­ing in a world lit only by foot­lights. Does won­der for female faces of a cer­tain age.

And finally, if you didn’t fol­low the com­ments yes­ter­day, please don’t miss Gene Weingarten’s take on the Henry Allen career K.O. It is wise and funny and dead-on, and shows why Wein­garten is not a writer to under­es­ti­mate, either, although I doubt he’ll punch any­one in his final act:

The first thing I want to say is, hooray. Hooray that there is still enough pas­sion left some­where in a news­room in Amer­ica for vio­lence to break out between col­or­ful char­ac­ters in dis­agree­ment over the qual­ity of a story. (Oblig­a­tory mature qual­i­fi­ca­tion: I of course decry any break­down in comity and col­le­gial­ity and civil dis­course in the work­place, and urge all young peo­ple to main­tain deco­rum and respect oth­ers, to be tol­er­ant of oppos­ing view­points, to seek com­pro­mise, and to not punch each other out in spit-flying scrums.)

Still, hooray. News­rooms used to be places filled with inter­est­ing eccentrics dri­ven by unrea­son­able pas­sions — a sit­u­a­tion thought of as “cre­ative ten­sion” and often encour­aged by man­age­ment in eras when prof­its were high and arro­gance was seen not as a flaw but a perquisite of being smart and right. Sadly, over the years news­rooms have come to resem­ble insur­ance offices peo­pled by the blanched and the pinched and the beetle-browed; lately, with lay­offs thought to be on the hori­zon, every­one also behaves extra nicely to please the boss. In the face of poten­tial ruin, jour­nal­ists have been forced to reach accom­mo­da­tions with them­selves: New stric­tures, new styles, new pro­to­cols, new lim­i­ta­tions on what is pos­si­ble are now meekly swal­lowed. In the fran­tic scram­ble for new “rev­enue streams,” eth­i­cal bound­aries are more likely to be pushed than is the prover­bial enve­lope. Some of all this has leached out into the prod­uct. We all feel it. You do, too.

There’s more, and you should read it. Bonus: A cou­ple of excerpts from Allen’s peer­less jour­nal­ism, which I neglected yes­ter­day.

UPDATE: Hank weighs in, and con­sid­ers the gay-insult angle.

Get­ting back to the elec­tion: On my errands the other day, I passed a traf­fic island in a busy inter­sec­tion. It sprouted two can­di­dates’ yard signs. Specif­i­cally: Abdalla Awwad and Karen Woj­cik. When you get depressed about the future, reflect on that lit­tle mir­a­cle, impos­si­ble or at least highly unlikely in Don Draper’s day — an Arab-American and a Polish-American woman, run­ning for munic­i­pal seats in a blue-collar sub­urb deep in the heart­land. Although — drum­roll — both lost. (Trum­pet wah-wah.)

I sup­pose yesterday’s polling will be spun as a sharp rebuke, or per­haps a warn­ing shot, or maybe even a repu­di­a­tion of Obama Nation. We’ll see. I don’t know enough about Vir­ginia or New Jer­sey pol­i­tics to say one way or another; the NY-23 race is far more inter­est­ing, the impor­ta­tion of an out-of-district car­pet­bag­ger to oppose a Repub­li­can nom­i­nee thought to be insuf­fi­ciently con­ser­v­a­tive. They can run their party how­ever they want, but so much for all that gassing about why Democ­rats won’t let pro-life mem­bers of their party address their con­ven­tions, etc. Make the tent smaller! That’s the ticket. Actu­ally, this is the ticket:

NY-23 is solidly Repub­li­can but not espe­cially con­ser­v­a­tive (it voted for Barack Obama last year), and Hoff­man was a rel­a­tively uncharis­matic can­di­date with poor com­mand of the local issues.

Car­pet­bag­gers are a hard sell. Although they do bring lots of media atten­tion to their back­ers. Do I have lip­stick on my teeth? No, Sarah, lovely as always.

I have noth­ing to say about that, either, because Jon Stew­art said it all here. Drag your slider to the 2/3 mark, and don’t miss the Beck Test.

And now I have to call some of those folks in that open­ing tweet. The win­ner for my local judi­cial race is a young guy with not a lot of name recog­ni­tion. But he stopped by my house three times and sev­eral times when I was out and about, I’d see him on his lonely shoe-leather quest to ring every door­bell in town. It’s true what they say, folks: It’s all local.

First, the cross­word puz­zle. Then phone calls.

47 responses to
“It’s all local.”

  1. LAMary said on November 4th, 2009 at 10:49 am

    Yes! That Jon Stew­art piece about Hoff­man was great. Peo­ple who wor­ried that he would run out of mate­r­ial with Bush gone so under­es­ti­mated his genius. I think he’s been in espe­cially fine form lately.
    I don’t think too much about some polit­i­cal shift should be read into Corzine los­ing in NJ. He was unpop­u­lar with both par­ties going in to the elec­tion and his cam­paign was obnox­ious.

  2. coozledad said on November 4th, 2009 at 11:16 am

    Wouldn’t read too much into VA, either. Deeds started to run against Obama in August and pretty much cut his own throat. Look for the Repub­li­cans to start push­ing their Regent grad as a pres­i­den­tial con­tender, at least until the pub­lic finds out where his dick’s been.

  3. brian stouder said on November 4th, 2009 at 11:44 am

    at least until the pub­lic finds out where his dick’s been.

    Reminds me of the line from a radio skit (either Bob and Tom, or some sim­i­lar show) revolv­ing around a car adver­tise­ment where the sales­man fin­ishes by say­ing “Come on down and bring your wife, and we’ll dicker”

  4. adrianne said on November 4th, 2009 at 11:59 am

    The peo­ple of the great expanse of North­ern New York have spo­ken, and they say: stuff your con­ser­v­a­tive, Club for Growth can­di­date foisted on us by the likes of Sarah and Rush. It turned out as I thought: they went with the Demo­c­rat.

    And that chubby guy tri­umphed in Jer­sey – so much for Corzine’s fat jokes. I’m just glad I don’t have to see another Chris Christie/Jon Corzine cam­paign com­mer­cial!

  5. Julie Robinson said on November 4th, 2009 at 12:12 pm

    No elec­tion this year in the Fort, how­ever there was this lit­tle nugget con­cern­ing the incom­pe­tent who ran for mayor last time: http://​www​.jg​.net/​a​r​t​i​c​l​e​/​2​0​0​9​1​1​0​4​/​L​O​C​A​L​0​3​/​3​1​1​0​4​9​9​7​2​/​1​0​0​2​/LOCAL. One of the pup­pet­mas­ters is suing his pup­pet to repay the money he loaned him for his cam­paign. That would be the loan that caused the felony con­vic­tion to begin with. No doubt some­one will write a let­ter to the edi­tor about what a fine Chris­t­ian man he is and that he is being need­lessly per­se­cuted. Despite that fact that he admit­ted every­thing and pleaded guilty. That’s how it works here.

  6. brian stouder said on November 4th, 2009 at 12:19 pm

    Julie – you gonna catch Andrew Sul­li­van when he speaks at IPFW on Novem­ber 10? I will almost cer­tainly be there (prob­a­bly with at least one of the young folks); his talk should be inter­est­ing, given the magic 8-ball elec­tion we just had

  7. mark said on November 4th, 2009 at 12:37 pm

    Thanks for link­ing the Steu­ver piece. I’d also won­dered about the pro­vok­ing com­ment. In my book, you call some­body a “cock­sucker” and you should be get­ting ready for a punch headed your way.

    I’d been think­ing of the issue in terms of dorothy’s com­ment about a niece becom­ing con­ver­sant with the word “fuck.” I don’t think fre­quency and casu­al­ness of use changes the vul­gar­ity of some epi­thets, and a change in tone or vol­ume will get you or some­body else hurt. I hadn’t con­sid­ered the pos­si­bil­ity that Allen’s response was an instan­ta­neous rebut­tal of an assault on his het­ero­sex­u­al­ity.

    If so, would that make Allen’s punch a “hate crime”? Just kid­ding.

  8. coozledad said on November 4th, 2009 at 1:06 pm

  9. LAMary said on November 4th, 2009 at 1:26 pm

    Thanks for those, cooz. Unfor­tu­nately, I can’t explain to any of the other folks in my office what I’m laugh­ing at. They either have no idea who Joe Lieber­man is or they hate every­thing Obama does, espe­cially health care reform.

  10. Sue said on November 4th, 2009 at 1:30 pm

  11. Old-time Editor said on November 4th, 2009 at 1:56 pm

    Fol­low­ing the Wein­garten link yes­ter­day even­tu­ally led me to a poem by John Updike about the death of a dog that’s one of the sad­dest things I’ve ever read. I don’t con­sider myself a sen­ti­men­tal dog-lover, but I keep think­ing about it, and its final words–”Good dog”–even today.
    It reminded me of the very sad death of a dog in William Maxwell’s novel “So Long, See You Tomor­row.” Maybe I am a sen­ti­men­tal dog lover.

  12. Scout said on November 4th, 2009 at 1:58 pm

    Does any­one here have any thoughts on the cur­rent trend to put mea­sures on bal­lots that allow a major­ity rule con­cern­ing the civil rights of fel­low cit­i­zens? Yes, I am talk­ing about Maine.

  13. MichaelG said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:03 pm

    Yeah, there’s really no way around it. Joe Lieber­man is a total scum bag. Has been all along. I loved his moral supe­ri­or­ity when Bill Clin­ton was in trou­ble.

    I’ve also seen “health care reform” all along as noth­ing but wel­fare for the insur­ance com­pa­nies. Espe­cially with­out the “pub­lic option”.

  14. coozledad said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:12 pm

    Scout:The only thought I’ve got about it is some folks never feel so free as when they’re med­dling in other people’s lives. They’re usu­ally the same folks who gin up rea­sons to kill other peo­ple. It’s creepy. And besides, it’s the polit­i­cal equiv­a­lent of panty sniff­ing.

  15. Jeff Borden said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:16 pm

    There wasn’t a lot that sur­prised me yes­ter­day. Jon Corzine not only ran an obnox­ious, arro­gant cam­paign, but he’s for­ever linked to Gold­man Sachs. Nice of him to pump mil­lions of his own dol­lars into the media mar­kets, though. Creigh Deeds was down double-digits from the start and ran a hor­ri­ble cam­paign, too. He spent the last sev­eral months trash­ing Obama, which made him sound just like McDon­nell except hyp­o­crit­i­cal.

    NY-23, how­ever, did sur­prise me. A dis­trict that last elected a Demo­c­rat to the House in 1871 seemed likely to give the Con­ser­v­a­tive Party Hoff­man a chance, but as Nancy noted, it’s tough for a car­pet­bag­ger out there. We saw that humil­i­at­ing spec­ta­cle in Illi­nois a few years ago, when the molder­ing shell of what is the Illi­nois GOP imported the cer­ti­fied lunatic Alan Keyes, who took an apart­ment in nearby Calumet City to estab­lish res­i­dence, then went out of his way to act like, well, Alan Keyes. Still, the hate­ful lit­tle man got more than a quar­ter of the vote, which is basi­cally my sense of how many really silly peo­ple live in Illi­nois.

    Mean­while, the GOP lost a reli­able vote on every­thing except choice and gay rights by forc­ing the GOP can­di­date into the ditch. Great job!

    Finally, as an ex-Catholic, can I apol­o­gize for the One True’s obses­sion with gay rights, which led to the sad news yes­ter­day in Maine? The whole anti mar­riage effort was directed by the Roman Catholic bishop up there, who appar­ently had plenty of time left­over after min­is­ter­ing to his flock to deny an entire class of peo­ple their rights. Truly a sad, revolt­ing spec­ta­cle.

  16. nancy said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:22 pm

    Some­one help. I just wrote this lede:

    A munic­i­pal elec­tion note­wor­thy for its lack of con­tested races con­cluded with few sur­prises and much relief for edu­ca­tors, who face steep state fund­ing cuts but were at least rewarded with a con­tin­u­a­tion of exist­ing tax mill­ages.

    It sucks, I know. Some­one help me rewrite it. I’m already sick of this elec­tion, and it barely hap­pened.

  17. Julie Robinson said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:26 pm

    Scout, it’s dis­ap­point­ing but long term I think the tide is chang­ing. Not much com­fort now, I real­ize.

    Brian, next week is all about prepar­ing a ser­mon for the fol­low­ing Sun­day. Yep, my church is crazy enough to let me preach and I’ll need to focus on that. Any­way, I’m not totally into polit­i­cal sausage mak­ing.

    All the dis­cus­sion about live TV reminds me that when my Dad did live radio broad­casts back in the 60′s and 70′s it was over a long dis­tance tele­phone line. He had to haul in equip­ment and plug in lit­tle giz­mos to make it work and was depen­dent on the qual­ity of the line he could raise. Small town radio being what it was, it was a one man show, and in Dad’s case, a one armed man, so he often recruited us kids to help carry in equip­ment. It was a soft sell since it meant we got in free and then were on our own to explore or hang out with friends. We often came back to watch Dad broad­cast­ing and when we were older we’d help with sta­tis­tics. Acu­tally, I never cared enough about foot­ball to do those stats, but I loved bas­ket­ball.

  18. moe99 said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:34 pm

    I really like Hank Steu­ver and what he writes gen­er­ally, but I think that he is being a bit too sen­si­tive on the use of the term, c***sucker, that spurred Henry Allen to fisticuffs. Frankly, after read­ing exam­ples of Allen’s writ­ing, I think the goad to Allen’s sen­si­bil­i­ties was that he was no longer suf­fi­ciently on top of what con­sti­tutes “jour­nal­ism,” not that he was some­how gay.

    In that regard, I am proud to note that the gay rights ini­tia­tive passed hand­ily in Wash­ing­ton state yes­ter­day. Yay! And the tax roll­back mea­sure was defeated! Yay! And the for­mer tv news per­son­al­ity who is on the board of the Dis­cov­ery Insti­tute and was not so secretly funded by repub­li­can right wingers was defeated in her bid to be King County exec­u­tive. Yay!

    And your begin­ning sen­tence, Nancy? I think that the last part should come first, not the other way around, but I am too foggy to sug­gest how to do it this am.

  19. Peter said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:34 pm

    Julie: Preach, Preacher! Good luck on the ser­mon. We’ll be pray­ing for ya.

  20. coozledad said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:35 pm

    Nancy: Do you want the right or left wing per­spec­tive?
    Right: The vot­ers have per­mit­ted shift­less mind warp­ing thugs to con­tinue loot­ing state cof­fers.
    Left: The vot­ers have essen­tially pissed on any edu­ca­tors’ hopes of a Thanks­giv­ing din­ner this year. The lucky ones will be eat­ing dog food.

  21. nancy said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:38 pm

    Excel­lent advice, you two. I think my prob­lem is, I feel like a douche when­ever I use the word “note­wor­thy.” I always want to put my fin­ger aside my chin and, you know, note some­thing.

  22. Jeff Borden said on November 4th, 2009 at 2:42 pm

    What about “an elec­tion lack­ing con­tested races…”

    Elim­i­nates note­wor­thy and it’s shorter.

  23. 4dbirds said on November 4th, 2009 at 3:07 pm

    I’m a Vir­gin­ian and knew Deeds was going to lose it when he dis­ap­peared after the pri­mary. When he did show up, he com­paigned as Repub­li­can light. Huh? We already had a Repub­li­can run­ning. Democ­rats stayed home. I couldn’t get my son to vote and believe me, I really put on the guilt trip. He said no, it was a protest on his part. No more blue dogs is what he said.

  24. Jolene said on November 4th, 2009 at 3:10 pm

    I think you are try­ing to make one sen­tence do too much work. How about:

    With no con­tested races, yesterday’s munic­i­pal elec­tion con­cluded with few sur­prises, but the results were good news for local edu­ca­tors who had feared that vot­ers would choose to cut exist­ing mill­age rates, fur­ther reduc­ing resources already strained by state bud­get cuts. Instead, exist­ing mill­age rates will be con­tin­ued, with the bal­lot mea­sure pass­ing with 67% of the vote.

    [or how­ever you would express that result]

  25. brian stouder said on November 4th, 2009 at 3:12 pm

    Here’s my van­dal­ism of Nance’s lede

    A munic­i­pal elec­tion with few con­tested races cli­maxed with few sur­prises in gen­eral, and much relief for edu­ca­tors in par­tic­u­lar, who face steep state fund­ing cuts but steady local sup­port with a con­tin­u­a­tion of exist­ing tax mill­ages.

    What can I say? I like cli­maxes fol­lowed by relief

  26. Jason T. said on November 4th, 2009 at 3:26 pm

    What can I say? I like cli­maxes fol­lowed by relief

    (rimshot)

    I’d cut that lede up … those sen­tences are work­ing too hard:

    Though there were few sur­prises, yesterday’s elec­tion at least brings some relief for local pub­lic school sys­tems. While Michi­gan pub­lic schools still face steep fund­ing cuts on the state level, local vot­ers by a x-point mar­gin agreed to hold exist­ing tax mill­ages steady.

    Few con­tested races were on the bal­lot in ….

  27. Sue said on November 4th, 2009 at 3:47 pm

    brian stouder, work a cig­a­rette ref­er­ence in there and I think Nancy’s got it.

  28. Deborah said on November 4th, 2009 at 4:03 pm

    It’s fas­ci­nat­ing watch­ing the lede hap­pen right before our eyes. Let us know how it ended up, please.

  29. Dorothy said on November 4th, 2009 at 4:34 pm

    What Deb­o­rah said! I love the hell out of you guys…

  30. Kirk said on November 4th, 2009 at 4:46 pm

    A cou­ple of peri­ods can do won­ders for many of the leads I see every day.

  31. Jolene said on November 4th, 2009 at 5:06 pm

    I was about to ask why some journos say “lede” and some say “lead”, but thought I could look it up for myself and that you might be inter­ested in what the dic­tio­nary had to say.

    Which is more com­monly used?

  32. mark said on November 4th, 2009 at 5:09 pm

    Were there actu­ally any sur­prises in an elec­tion with no con­tested races? Or were the sur­prises unre­lated to the uncon­tested races?

  33. Kirk said on November 4th, 2009 at 6:04 pm

    Around our shop, more peo­ple prob­a­bly use “lede,” but I use “lead” because that’s the way I learned it and it relates to what the word means. “Lede” is a reflec­tion of the ten­dency of every field, busi­ness or pro­fes­sion (and jour­nal­ism is not a pro­fes­sion) to have its own lingo.

  34. alex said on November 4th, 2009 at 7:46 pm

    Where’s Con­nie been?

    Haven’t seen hide nor hair of her since our fun out­ing a cou­ple of weeks ago. She was plan­ning to drive up to Grand Rapids for din­ner with her brother before head­ing home from the library con­ven­tion, quite an ambi­tious itin­er­ary.

    Speak­ing of ledes, grafs, etc. … I remem­ber some hot-lead-specific jar­gon from my first job in a pub­lish­ing house. (This was in Chicago after the Tri­bune told the printer’s union to go screw in 1979, but before other employ­ers had worked up the same nerve. Jobs in the obso­lete mode of type­set­ting still existed until the late 1980s at the behest of the union, many of whose mem­bers didn’t want to tran­si­tion to elec­tronic meth­ods.) To my untrained ear, one job was called the “bees knees,” and it seemed to fit with the mostly older crowd per­form­ing it. It was actu­ally “B’s & E’s” (or Begin­nings & Ends) and it involved proof­read­ing by match­ing up the lines and grafs of gal­leys and printed pages.

  35. coozledad said on November 4th, 2009 at 7:47 pm

    Car­rie Pre­jean dropped her law­suit against the Miss USA pageant after they showed her fif­teen sec­onds of her XXX movie. She didn’t even make it to the shower cur­tain scene.
    http://​www​.tmz​.com/​2​0​0​9​/​1​1​/​0​4​/​c​a​r​r​i​e​-​p​r​e​j​e​a​n​-​s​e​x​-​t​a​p​e​-​s​e​t​t​l​e​m​e​n​t​-​m​i​s​s​-​c​a​l​i​f​o​r​n​i​a​-​u​s​a​-​p​a​gneat/
    Fam­ily val­ues my ass.

  36. Jolene said on November 4th, 2009 at 7:51 pm

    Al Gore will be on The Daily Show tonight–just in case that floats your boat.

    Gore was on Let­ter­man last night. Although watch­ing Let­ter­man is a lit­tle creepy now–and he seems a lit­tle tight in terms of what he says–I haven’t bro­ken the habit yet. And I do think that he’s always been good at inter­view­ing seri­ous peo­ple in a way that gets at ques­tions that peo­ple want answered. Also, he’s men­tioned sev­eral times that he’s con­cerned about cli­mate change, so he and Gore had a pretty detailed con­ver­sa­tion about it–that is, for a con­ver­sa­tion on a talk show.

  37. Deborah said on November 4th, 2009 at 9:04 pm

    We call it, “Cleav­age for Jesus”. In ref­er­ence to coozledad’s post about Car­rie Pre­jean. We see a lot of young rightwing Chris­tian­ite women with their cleav­age all hang­ing out. What’s with that?

  38. crinoidgirl said on November 4th, 2009 at 9:20 pm

    I’m now offi­cially poor. My unem­ploy­ment has run out. The free­lance stuff won’t man­age the house pay­ment and the power.

    I have an inter­view next week in Ann Arbor for $17/hr that I orig­i­nally turned down. I have to ace this or I’m screwed.

    Ack.

  39. coozledad said on November 4th, 2009 at 10:06 pm

    I am led to believe Carrie’s movie starred only her­self and her hand. It wasn’t “Straponzel” or “Bub­bles Swal­lows a Ford”, dammit.

  40. nancy said on November 4th, 2009 at 10:12 pm

    Straponzel. Milk just came out my nose.

  41. moe99 said on November 4th, 2009 at 10:37 pm

  42. brian stouder said on November 4th, 2009 at 10:49 pm

    and the win­ner was:

    A munic­i­pal elec­tion short on con­tested races con­cluded with few sur­prises and much relief for edu­ca­tors, who face steep state fund­ing cuts but were at least rewarded with a con­tin­u­a­tion of exist­ing tax mill­ages.

    So, as Miss Cal­i­for­nia might well agree – if you want a ‘cli­max’, you have to do it your­self

  43. Jeff (the mild-mannered one) said on November 4th, 2009 at 10:57 pm

    I can’t believe i’ve never read Henry’s piece on the News-as-you-seen-it-on-TV-um. Delight­ful.

    Moe, delighted that you’re sim­ply fuzzy. May it all be a happy blur until health snaps back into focus. And i think we should all jointly write Julie’s ser­mon, just like Nancy’s lead para. Oh what fun a ser­mon by com­mit­tee could be, hee hee hee.

    Every­body plan to come to Ohio and gam­ble with us, OK? Sorry ’bout that, Indi­ana; we’re swap­ping ill-gotten gains with you next year, los­ing the Hoosier State $100 mil­lion in tax rev­enue for starters, and gain­ing our own new, larger class of addicts, because we don’t have enough com­pul­sive self-destructive ten­den­cies.

    What Michigan’s gonna do to make bud­get i have no earthly idea. Yeah, i know, raise taxes.

  44. brian stouder said on November 4th, 2009 at 11:24 pm

    Moe – what will the birthers say about this? Obama ain’t just a for­eign born liar enthralled with com­mie social­ist left­wing unAmer­i­can unCon­sti­tu­tional sub­ver­sion, but in fact he’s in cahoots with space aliens!

    Dammit – I knowed we shoulda’ put ol’ Sarah a heart­beat away from the Oval Office! Hell – all she’d a’ had to do was accidently-on-purpose emerge from a shower with a skimpy towel on (at the right moment), and the old naval avi­a­tor might have punched right out, and we coulda had down-home clue­less­ness instead of crafty alien Vis­i­tors who like social­ist com­mie acorns

  45. beb said on November 5th, 2009 at 9:18 am

    Car­rie Pre­jean had a sex video? Will won­ders never cease? This woman is like a nev­erend­ing story of mirth and embarass­ment. I guess her next step will be to join that real­ity pro­gram with Ron Jeremy so they can have inti­mate dis­cus­sions about tech­niques and stuff.

    “Cle­veage for Jesus.” Obvi­ously, if God didn’t want to see a lit­tle titty he would never have put breasts on women.

    I’m just glad I wasn’t drink­ing any milk when I read “Straponzel.”

  46. Dorothy said on November 5th, 2009 at 9:43 am

    I would have been hav­ing my morn­ing cup of tea but hadn’t fixed it yet, oth­er­wise I too would have doused my key­board with a bev­er­age over “Straponzel.”

    Brian I have been won­der­ing about Con­nie as well. I’ve been try­ing to find a quilt show to go to in Indi­ana so I could arrange a meet-up with her. One of these days….

  47. Julie Robinson said on November 5th, 2009 at 10:44 am

    Jeff tmmo, I love it! Here’s the lessons: Daniel 12:1-3, Psalm 16, Hebrews 10:11-25 and Mark 13:1-8. I’m think­ing of using the Hebrews quote from Jere­miah about the new covenant’s law being writ­ten on our hearts and what that looks like in the world. Then I can riff on all the ways women are serv­ing (did I men­tion it’s women of the church thankof­fer­ing day?). I’m think­ing about call­ing it Role Mod­els. There are some absolutely amaz­ing women who spend their days help­ing other peo­ple out of love and I’d like to lift them up.