Mac Thomason has a new adventure: Captain Euro goes to Disney Worldin search of Janet Reno. Politics, Goofy, and Captain Eurowhat more can you ask?
Sorry, that's all I've got for you. Out most of the day, home late, and up early tomorrow. But I'll have plenty of things to write about then. permalink
Amazing. Her speech went on. It was protested. Nobody was arrested. Nothing was broken. Why is that? Oh, right. The Palestinians weren't the ones protesting. They wanted to hear the speaker. One article:
Here's how Ashrawi responded to some students in the audience holding up signs:
Yeah. Holding up a sign means you're not listening. Holding up a sign is the equivalent of shooting at her. She's learned her lies well.
From the same newspaper:
As promised: I received the letter below a couple of days ago, and since I'm in no mood to get the sexism debate going again (and still not recovered from Phase II of The Ailment Currently Known As A Sort Of Cold), I'd much rather fisk a Nigerian scam spam. Except you can't even call it fisking, because this one is practically a parody of itself. It came from "Shapiro Morris," which name had me instantly howling with laughter because it's obvious that many Africans haven't a clue about Jews, being obviously unable to even tell a last name from a first. See if you can tell which are the letter parts, and which are my remarks.
It occurs to me that it's been entirely too somber around here lately. And besides, there are a couple of search phrases that I haven't used yet that are tickling my fancy. I don't know what my fancy is, exactly, or how it's being tickled, and in fact, I do not like to be tickled (does any control freak?) and am not very ticklish (years of training myself not to react to being tickled) and wow, I had not intended to reveal quite so much of my personality to the nameless masses who read this weblog. All right, nameless masses: Forget what I just wrote. Okay? S'aright.
questions that make people look stupid: I know a search phrase that makes someone look stupid
free muslim burqa pics: I puzzled over this one for a bit, and then I realized: It's a new Islamic movement. There are thousands, if not millions, of imprisoned muslim burqa pictures worldwide, and these brave souls are going to free them all! And of course, since it's an Islamic movement, there will be a radical portion of it that insist this cannot be done without violence. Look for Fotomats worldwide to be targeted and bombed. Warn any of your relatives who work there to be careful. And folksclear your hard drives.
the blind ones homepage: Oh, that one's too easy. Must... resist... impulse. Nah. Indymedia.
mallomars: O, Enlightened One! Thank you for reminding me that Mallomars are due back in the stores now that summer is near an end. And they'll be on sale, too. At least, in New Jersey. I wonder how Mallomars are considered here in Gentile country? Probably something like, "Wow, these are just like Pinwheels!" Philistines. (See, I'm insulting my neighbors without even giving them the chance to first make those statements. This is known as "tolerance.") Mind you, I should probably lay off the Mallomars for a while, because while drying myself off this morning I noticed a curve in my waist that I haven't seen in some time. The diet continues to be working. Well, maybe the fast on Yom Kippur can counteract the box of Mallomars I intend to eat the day before. If I can find them.
hot nj girl blog: You better believe it, baby! Complete with pictures of my... cats. (Insert your own synonym, I'm not gonna do it.)
Hey. That was fun. Next up for the humor patrol: I received a really hilarious new Nigerian scam email that I will share with one and all. Because I'm just that nice.
Oh, wait, I almost forgot. I received an email from a non-Jewish reader (that I think was mostly joking) about how I didn't wish my non-Jewish readers a Happy New Year. But she got me to thinking. (Ow, that hurt.) So I thought I'd mention that I did intend the greetings for all my readers, and added a special traditional Jewish greeting for my Jewish readers. I did not intend for anyone to feel excluded, but I didn't think non-Jews would get the reference.
Let me say that I've never written this weblog with the intent to attract only one type of reader. Oh, screw that PC shit. Let me speak plain English. I'm not writing this weblog only for Jews. I am writing it for myself, and I want it to appeal to everyone. Because I am Jewish, Jewish issues are of great interest to me, and I write about them frequently. But that's not what yourish.com is all about. If it was, I'd change the name to jewrish.com. Hey. Now there's an idea... a second weblog... nah. Too much work. Anyway. Just as I don't want this weblog typecast, neither will I typecast my readers. All are welcome. None are turned away. (Like I could control who loads this page into a browser anyway, but shhh, let's pretend for a moment that I could.) Well, okay, maybe a few, but they started it. permalink
Catching up on some emails: Josh Kraushaar reports on how the American liberals who were counter-protesting the neo-nazi rally in D.C. last week turned on a young woman because she was carrying an Israeli flag. You know. The flag of that Jewish country that the neo-nazis were protesting. However, irony is a talent only of intelligent people, so the protesters just didn't get it.
(Psst... Sarah... your nonviolent beliefs are useless. Next time, try introducing them to the business end of the flagpole. Just once, I'd love to see an article by a formerly nonviolent person who says, "I realized my nonviolent methods were a waste of time, so I shoved my flagpole up their asses." Just once.) permalink
An eyewitness account by Sara Aronheim of the anti-Jewish riot at Concordia University in Montreal, via LGF:
Is this what we have to look forward to at SFSU and other American universities? The lies about protesting Israeli policies have worn thin.
These are not Israelis. These are Jews.
This is not protesting Israel's policies. This is anti-Semitism.
This is not free expression. This is suppression of speech.
This is not protest. This is naked hatred.
The brownshirts of the 21st century wear the kaffiyeh today. Must we wait for another Kristallnacht before we squash those responsible for this hate? Will the book-burnings begin soon? The targeted deaths of Jews has been going on, worldwide, for decades. Will Canada be the next country to see scores of Jews die in a terrorist attack?
Shame on you, Concordia. Shame on you, Montreal. Shame on you for allowing this kind of lawlessness and hate free reign. permalink
More 9/11 posts, and some of them may be a tad angry:
Simon: It is night time in Ramallah.
The same flames out of Hell that Nazi hate that seared my people have been called upon to bake the candy and cookies that the Palestinians will hand out in celebrations when dawn breaks tomorrow. They will wave their flags. They will burn ours.
Grasshoppa: I hope on this anniversary, that the images of 9-11 which are flooding our airwaves and our networks will remind us this is not over and that we must keep both eyes on our enemies while keeping one on ourselves and our government. I know that many who have not directly suffered from 9-11 will be brought to tears by the replay of that fateful day, but tears will accomplish precious little.
Diane E.: Two words, and they're not what you think. (Or at least, not the two I thought they were.)
Jeff Jarvis: ...I came up out of the subway at the World Trade Center not long before 8 o'clock -- one hour short of a year after I came up out of the PATH train here.
In front of me were family members waiting to get into the memorial service, some carrying, many wearing the pictures of their loved ones, gone.
A parade of pain.
Some extraordinary 9/11 posts:
Cold Fury: The sympathy from the rest of the world was genuine, I think. The goodwill and courage of the free world is intact, or so I hope and believe.
Susanna Cornett: This time last year, the WTC dominated that view. Smoke dominated it for days after 9/11. Now, nothing dominates it. Somehow, that nothingness is the most intrusive of all. I want to say, every day: The WTC is still gone. Just so you know.
Teresa Nielsen Hayden: A year ago tomorrow I stood on the roof of my building and watched the towers burning. All that day the wind blew straight from Ground Zero to my street, tiny particles of dust and ash mixed with holocaust smoke that smelled like burned plastic. At evening, the cooling column of smoke rained down scraps of scorched paper.
A Small Victory: The men whose pictures you see above were the friends of my father. They all died on September 11, and they all died as heroes. Yes, they were doing their job. But they did not have to rush up those stairs. They did not have to run in when everyone else was running out. Any one of them could have turned and ran with the crowd. They didn't. They went into that building hoping to rescue survivors. They never came out. (Click here for the complete set.)
Karl Martino: We don't say much. Just holding on to one another. Looking at the live shots of people deciding to jump. Of the buildings falling. Of the hit on the Pentagon. The reports of other planes out there. Of fight 93. Wondering how many innocent lives were lost. Hearing stories of heroism. Making calls to friends and family. Saying prayers.
War Now!: I watched tonight on TV as Marines stood at attention in my country with tears running down their faces I cried I was proud to stand with the country that produced those people.
At 8:46 am this morning two choirs, one in our capital and one in our largest city, began to sing a requiem.
Samizdata: I have just got back from lunch and what I saw on the King's Road in Chelsea, here in London, amazed me. There is no law requiring it, no government departments 'encouraging' it loudly, yet shop after shop are displaying signs saying words to the effects of "At 1:46 pm to day, we will be observing two minutes silence in remembrance of the atrocities on September 11th of last year in the United States." Others are expressing memorial sentiments, still others just displaying small American flags.
NZ Bear: Perhaps I will be proven wrong, but the track record up until this point is not good. We seem to be embracing the role of victim; not just commemorating it, but celebrating it. We are in danger of remembering what occurred a year ago today as a tragedy that just "happened".
But what is being overwhelmed in the cult of victimhood is that forty men and women refused to accept their role as passive victims. They saw the face of the enemy; they learned the evil it had done already and the work it still had left to be done on that day.
And they said "no more". They drew the line: this far, and no farther.
A note for today: It took nearly three hours to read the names of the victims of the WTC. permalink
A Perfect Morning is a website started to collect memories and essays of 9/11. From its mission statement:
My essay, The Things I learned from 9/11, is there. Here's an excerpt.
The organizers are collecting essays. You don't have to have a website to contribute. Write one and email it. Remember. permalink
Round one goes to my students. Good Lord, I was not expecting to have more trouble from the girls than from the boys. I'm still flabbergasted. (I think I'm a sexist. Everything is making me think I'm a sexist these days.)
So here was my day: I woke up with the most awful sore throat, a stuffed-up head, and (sigh) first-day cramps. I have CVS Daytime Liquid Capsules, which are my shotgun symptom-reliever of choice. No matter how bad a sore throat you have, this stuff makes it go away. I love it. It's magic. I've been on it all day, and will be taking the nighttime capsules momentarily. But hey, I managed to finish my lesson plan. I was proud of my lesson plan. I'd like to post my lesson plan, because every teacher out there would fall on the floor in hysterics at the utter cluelessness and naivete it portrays.
Chaos reigned. Snack-time is 4:00. The snacks were not ready. So the kids went, snackless, into the 4:15 assembly, which was supposed to take 15 minutes. It took longer. These are kids who've been in regular school all day and who are probably starving and tired and antsy and want nothing more than to go home and play, and we're giving them two more hours of schooling. So we get back to my classroom, and I start taking attendance and trying to get to know my kids. Sensing new blood, the sharks begin to circle. They take a few nips and decide they like it. Yup, they've got a new one, a real sucker. They draw blood. The battle lines are drawn, when in comes one of the parents, with the snack: Apple slices and honey.
I will never allow honey in my classroom ever again. It got tracked onto the girls' table and half a dozen books. I was still cleaning up honey after class was over. Then the kids got taken out for music and some time with the Rabbi to learn a few prayers. By the time that was over, I had thirty-five minutes left and had taught them, essentially, never run down the stairway to the classroom, don't interrupt when someone else is speaking (that one didn't take well at all), and, well, that was about it. Unless you count, "This one's a sucker, let's see what we can get away with around her."
But I won the second battle. I had had enough. The last half-hour, those kids were mine. I got them to quiet down enough to be told by one "I don't think you're as nice a teacher as Mrs. Shapiro." I was thrilled (and vastly amused) to hear that. (Mrs. Shapiro is their last teacher who, they assured me, was the nicest teacher they ever had and they all missed her.) But we got to finish the lesson in writing Hebrew script. I taught them four letters, and they did fairly well in it, and even decided it was fun.
Next week, I will be even better prepared. Next week, there will be nothing like the chaos that reigned today. Next week, the children will not be walking all over me. I had dinner with the fifth grade teacher, and we discussed our afternoon in a state of shock and exhaustion. We're both the new kids on the block. Neither of us has ever taught more than one student at a time before, and they all figured that out. Both of us, however, have sworn that next week, there will be quiet, and order, and raising of hands to speak. I intend to get through my lesson plan.
I do have one question, though: When did it become okay for kids to bitch about every single thing that happens in a classroom? They bitched about the color of their folders ("I don't like yellow!"), they bitched about the sharpness or dullness of their pencils ("I can't write with a dull pencil, it has to be really sharp!"), they bitched about how cold it was when we first entered the classroomabout the only thing they didn't bitch about was the fact that it was Tuesday, and give them time, and they'll probably bitch about that, too.
I still can't believe it was the girls. Traitors. Obviously, their mothers haven't finished teaching them about the Vast Sisterhood Theory, wherein you're supposed to always give a fellow XX a break, and only give a hard time to the XYs. I'll have to take them aside secretly and teach them myself, obviously. Next week. I'll put it in the lesson plan. permalink
I habe a code id by head, and I have survived my first day teaching fourth-graders in religious school (see above). All you're getting from me tonight is another round-up on responses, and a brief description of my day with the children.
Charles Kuffner has a thoughtful post on the subject, and adds some interesting numbers
NZ Bear says I'm wrong about his grand entrance.
Brigitte Eaton posts some figures from her portal database, and elsewhere regarding male/female blogging and internet usage. She points to the article that details gender internet usage, as well. Thanks, Brig.
Jim Miller has a fascinating angle to this discussion, and I'm incredibly tempted to say, "You don't know nothin' 'bout birthin' no babies," but I won't. Oops. I just did. (You knew I would, didn't you, Jim?)
Peter Briffa: Short, sweet, to the point. (But Peter, I am a liberal. Mostly. And you're right. Mostly. I'm so confused. Mostly.)
If there are any more out there, you'd best send me email, quicklyI sense a disturbance in the Force, and it's saying, "What? Aren't you done with that topic yet? Geez!" permalink
Excellent article. Please read it all. permalink
Also from Kesher Talk, plenty of information on the anti-Jewish riot that forced Benjamin Netanyahu to cancel his speech at Concordia University (doesn't "concordia" mean peace?):
And may I say: Bastards. permalink
Yeah, that was a misleading title. Made you look.
Having just returned from a quick run to replenish my supply of Cold-Eeze, which is spelled abominably but which happens to be the only homeopathic remedy that has ever worked for me (zinc lozenges; they reduce or eliminate the effects of a cold you are coming down with, and my bug is back or a new one is attacking me as we speak, and I have 12 fourth-graders to teach tomorrow afternoon and a lesson plan to finish, so...), I am going to put together a quick update. [later] Okay, maybe not so quick.
Amptoons is a site that I've been to a few times and think I will visit much more often. Not only does the author have a wonderful post about sexism in and out of the blogosphere, but he hates Garfield, too! "Why Peanuts kicks Garfield's Sad Furry Ass" is a must-read. But to the topic at hand. First, like Ampersand, I have to quote Diane E.:
And a few remarks from me: J. Bowen at No Watermelons left me a bunch of questions that he calls "pointed" and I call "really mad." I guess it's an interpretation thinga quick read of his post left me thinking, "Wow, he's really mad at me." This is why:
Many of these questions are contentious and challenging, and all of them are minefields which will lead to what are basically exercises in rhetoric if I answer them. I'll pass, except to say: WTF does Ann Coulter have to do with anything? But I will answer some other suppositions from Bowen:
1) Actually, studies have shown that more women than men are online now. If you like, I'll dig up the online references to them. Or you can search yourself in Wired's archives. 2) Where is your data on that? I've never read any such fact. 3) and 4) Huge leap of faith there. Are you trying to say that women don't care about politics? Technology? Sports? That only men are interested in reading warblogs? I'm not buying that argument, and you aren't doing such a good job selling it. On what are you basing your facts? How many of your readers are female? Male? How about my readers? What's the ratio of Diane E.'s readers, male to female?
Sorry, J, but you're coming off as, well, sexist.
And you're judging from what? Warbloggers' sites? There are a lot more weblogs out there that you've never heard of. I've read a lot of diary-style weblogs written by men. Which is not to say that women don't write a lot of journal-style blogs, but you are looking from a very narrow viewpoint. Ever hear of Brian May? He wrote an amazing journal of his time as a security guard at the last Winter Olympics. The Shifted Librarian? Loriloo? LittleYellow Different? They're all bloggers with their own followings. Some are men, some are women. I'm guessing you never heard of any of them. They're not warbloggers.
My information was derived from perusing blogrolls of weblogs that I read regularly, or other popular weblogs that I know of. It was far from scientific, but neither was I making things up. I have a pretty good idea of what goes on in the techblogs and the warblogs; I keep up with major sites from both aspects and read a wide variety of blogs. What can I say, I like a wide variety of reading material. Your viewpoint, if coming only from the warblogger turf, is necessarily narrow. But even speaking only of the warblogging section, I think you're pretty far off the mark.
When you've got some statistics to back up your assertions, I'll be happy to revisit the issue. permalink
Those two sentences brought home a great point: Ultimately, I don't care whether or not people agree with me about sexism and blogging. The topic has been raised and questioned, and as Dane showed me, it has brought a number of women bloggers to the notice of people who might otherwise never have read their weblogs. That's a win-win.
And in that spirit, here are some more of the women bloggers I didn't mention yesterday:
Andrea See (thanks to a blogger who shall remain nameless, but who was accused of sexism by some in this discussion, who reminded me about Andrea).
Shelley Powers (So I don't agree with her politics. She's a woman, she blogs, she knows tech better than a lot of the guys. She rates.)
Oh, yeahI can't forget Karl Martino's look at this. It's succinct, and quite funny.
I'm sure I'm forgetting many more, but I'm posting this at 11 p.m. last night, and I need to beat this second wave virus. permalink
This is all NZ Bear's fault; he made me do it. Anyway, here's a compendium of other bloggers' take on sexism, blogging, and linking:
Dawn Olsen answers her critics.
NZ Bear adds his two cents.
No Watermelons gets really mad at me.
Just One Minute insults me in the nicest of ways.
Gene Expressions gets me from both sides of the gender divide.
Diane E. gets into it. (Scroll down; it's in there, trust me. Look for the phrase "Meryl is right.")
Improved Clinch has a say.
Win Fitzpatrick seems as confused as I am, but that didn't stop either of us from posting.
Susanna Cornett says it's the free market in action.
Just a few quick comments, though: I'm not angry, folks, and I'm surprised any of you are painting me as such. I'll answer all questions and comments later tonight. And I probably will post emails as well.
Update: Natalie Solent expands her views.
Andrew joins MommaBear over at Dodgeblog.
Nobody else has written me, although I did get a new Nigerian spam letter that's going to the top of my list of "Blog it!" because it's the funniest one yet. Sexism can wait. permalink
Dawn goes on to say that of course no one is obligated to link to anyone else, but her frustration and anger with the Big Boys is clear. Her solution to this problem for the moment is to start a bit of a revolution: She will no longer link to the A-listers who won't link to her. Bear discusses this on his site, but his solutionthe BlogMD projectwon't do anything in the short term.
I'm late to this party, but let me see if I can get this into a nutshell: Dawn is upset because when she does get linked from the A-listers, they tend to be links only to her posts on sex. Otherwise, she is ignored. Neither is she on Glenn's blogroll; Dawn says he has only "serious" women bloggers in his sidebar. (Full disclosure: I'm on Glenn's blogroll.) This lack of attention from people like den Beste and Sullivan is sexist, she says. They pay more attention to the male bloggers than they do female bloggers.
The problem here is that there are two issues. The first is the issue of sexism: Do the A-listers link more often to male bloggers and ignore female bloggers? Do the guys have an online boys club where they check their buddies out first? Was it sheer coincidence that NZ Bear shot up to the top of the blogosphere? Or was it sexism, as no female blogger has ever garnered the attention he received quite so quickly? (We're talking pre-ecosystemGlenn Reynolds, Bill Quick, and Stephen Green treated Bear like a long-lost brother returned home. Hey, the guy's my offline friend, I introduced him to the blogosphere, and even I was struck by twinges of envy at his instant results. I had to work my ass off for nearly a year to get the kind of notice and traffic he got in his first month.)
The second issue is seriousness: See below; this post got too long.
The answer to the first question: Yes, I think there is sexism in the blogosphere, and it is for the most part unintentional. I was working on a post on that topic months ago, and as a for-instance, I checked the blogrolls of the weblogs I visited regularly and discovered an appalling ratio of female-to-male bloggers on blogrolls. As I recall, the best ratio around was on Bruce Hill's War Now!, but it was still a pretty pathetic ratio, something like only 14%. And even more surprising, most women bloggers had abysmal female-to-male blogger ratios on their blogrolls. The larger question which begs to be asked, of course, is whether or not there are that few women writing warblogs, techblogs, or other "serious" blogs. The answer: I think so. There is no standardized, gender-divided list, although Brigitte at Eatonweb is working to put together a categorized blog search at her portal. (And damn me if I haven't realized until now that she's not on my links page. Fixed. See what I mean? Even me.) But even though there are more women online than ever before, and even though studies are showing that surfers are increasingly female, it does appear that the majority of "serious" weblogs the non-journals, non-frivolous political or tech blogsare still overwhelmingly written by men. Or at least, the ones we link to are. The only exception I can think of is Blogsisters, a weblog written exclusively by women, and which blogroll is exclusivelyand deliberatelyfemale.
Take a look at the blogrolls on Scripting News or Doc's place, or even Diane E. and Megan McArdle, and you'll find few women-written weblogs. Again, I'm not saying this is deliberate. But it is a striking fact. It's not just the men. Even women have a low female-to-male blogroll ratio.
So what's to be done about it? That, too, is a tough one. I believe that bloggers would be better off checking a few of the female pundits on a more regular basis. I try to rectify that bias by sometimes deliberately emphasizing women bloggers in my linkage posts, but I've seen no reason to announce that fact, either. I just make the extra effort every so often. Do I think that Sullivan, Reynolds, Quick, et al owe women bloggers a special look-see? Nope. But I think they'd be better off remembering that there are more than a few women bloggers out there, and they've got a lot of interesting things to say. permalink
To continue with the topic started above: Can a woman who posts erotic fiction, a picture of her ass with the caption "By Special Request-My Ass Is my Blog HOT or NOT?" and interviews where the second question to Pejman is "How old were you when you had your first sexual experience?" be taken seriously by the Big Boys of Blogging?
Dawn Olsen thinks so. Why can't people link to her serious topic blogs as well as to the sexually-oriented ones? Here's a part of my email exchange with NZ Bear on that subject (and please note that Glenn never said the below, it is just a made-up example):
Is it a different standard? No. Dawn Olsen's weblog schtick is sexuality. Whatever it started as, or whatever it wants to be, when you post erotic fiction; when you put up half-naked pictures of yourself to get more people to contribute to the Blogathon; when you have a picture of your ass adorning your main page, your angle is sex. So people will be reading your blog expecting to read about sex, and when you suddenly post a seven-point essay on The Effects of Automatic Weapons on WWII Casualties, people will be thinking, "Huh? Where's the sex stuff?"
Laurence Simon's angle is humor, yes. But his humor is for the most part topical, and is taken from the latest headlines. It's already political. So when Lair stops being funny and gets serious, you tend to say, "Wow, he must be pretty pissed about this," or "He feels pretty strongly about this topic." Of course, some will say, "Huh? Where's the funny stuff?" but hey, some people find it difficult to walk and chew gum at the same time.
Yeah, I've heard the argument: There are great investigative articles in Playboy and Penthouse. I've even read many of them, since in my days as a typesetter my typehouse published Penthouse. But those investigative articles are not written by the women who are spreading their legs for the centerfold. It's a credibility issue. It's difficult to take Dawn seriously under these circumstances. Having said that, I would absolutely link to Dawn if she wrote a post that I found interesting that I thought my readers would also like. But as I don't read Dawn's blog on a regular basis, someone else is going to have to point those posts out to me. And I don't read Dawn regularly not because I think she's not a serious or good writer, but because I'm simply not interested in the erotic fiction or the sex talk. I don't want to wade through it to see if she's put up a "serious" post.
There's another blogger out there that I'm sure has a lot of good things to say: Fred Lapides. Imshin mentions him frequently, and I've visited his site once or twice. I have no interest in reading it on a regular basis because he likes to post pictures of women in various stages of undress. I refuse to get past the tittie pictures to find out why Imshin raves about him. It's not my cup of tea. Note that I'm not saying he shouldn't post these pictures. Just that I won't read his blog because of them. I don't want to wade through the drek to get to the serious postings.
If you spend an overwhelming amount of words (or pictures) in your weblog on one theme, and then get annoyed with people when they lock you into that theme, you've already lost the high ground. It's rather unfair to blame people for thinking of you in one way when you've worked hard to establish that they do think of you that way. Dawn, my suggestion: Start a new weblog for your serious topics, and stick with the sexuality on Up Yours. I can't see any other way out of your dilemma. permalink
I had a wonderful time the first night of Rosh Hashana, and the Hulk is the reason for it. Honest.
See, The Stan Lee Solution was reprinted in the Comic Buyers Guide about the time I was visiting Richmond for an apartment hunt. I was sent to Dave's Comics via a Barnes & Noble's, which did not stock the magazine. There I met Dave and Sheryl, the owners of Dave's Comics, and discovered that the column wasn't yet out. But I kept in touch with Dave and Sheryl, because they were members of a Conservative synagogue that I was thinking of joining. (And because the world of comics is trying to draw me back into a $25-a-week habit.) And a couple of weeks ago, Sheryl asked me if I would write a press release for the joint Kristallnacht activities that her and my synagogue will be having. (I wound up not joining their synagogue after all.) Okay, I said. (It'll only be another minute, bear with me. Besides, you know how much I love parenthetical statements. Well, as long as I don't get lost in them, or off the point. Oh. Sorry.)
So last week, we met with a woman I'll call Inge, uh, because her name is Inge. We sketched out what we needed for the press release, tore the draft to pieces and rewrote it, and chatted for a while. And then a day or so later, I got an email from Inge, inviting me to dinner with her family Saturday night.
And so I spent Rosh Hashana with Inge and her family and friends, and instead of being all alone in a new town on Rosh Hashana, a most lonely and unacceptable situation, I was warmly welcomed by a group of really sweet, fun, and interesting people. And the brisket was indescribably delicious. (Well, the whole meal was excellent, but ooh, the brisket...)
And the Hulk was the common thread binding this all together. See, he doesn't just smash. Hulk make new friends.
Have I mentioned lately how much I'm liking Richmond, and how friendly the people are down here? New Jersey is never getting me back. permalink
Last week's blogs are archived. Here's the Blogathon. The Superhero Dating Ratings are here. If you're looking for something funny, try the Hulk's solution to the Middle East conflict, or Yasser Arafat Secret Phone Transcripts. Iseema bin Laden's diary and The Fudd Doctrine are also good bets if you've never been here before.