Laura wrote yesterday about this article and an amazing list compiled by Dr. John Brignell, a British engineering professor, that contains over 600 links of media stories ascribing the cause of everything under the sun to global warming. Aside from patent absurdity, I think this must mean that global warming is replacing George Bush as the identified source of all bad things as far as the rabid nay-saying alarmists among us are concerned. I guess they need to migrate from GWB since he'll be out of office in a year.

And speaking of insane, how about the Sudanese who want to execute the teacher whose classroom named a teddy bear Mohammed? In Britain, the Daily Mail (among others) is organizing a petition to get her freed from her jail sentence (yes, 15 day jail sentence, believe it or not) but in the Sudan, some machete-wielding maniacs took to the streets demanding her execution. Apparently it's perfectly all right to burn American flags and effigies of American government officials, just not to be affectionate and cute about Mohammed.

And in Dutchess County, NY, three high school students were planning to orchestrate a Columbine anniversary blood bath. (The local newspaper's idiotic headline says they are "good" kids. Gee, what would count as "bad"???) The good news is that a student reported having heard the rumblings about it. The bad news is that Arlington is an otherwise unremarkable community with no economic or social extremes. My conclusion, therefore, is that employing unspeakable cruelty and violence has at last made its disgusting way into all layers and kinds of human beings.

And on a much different front, the U.S. presidential candidate debates continue to be run as if it's a high school election. Planted questions, paid advocates of the opposition masquerading as completely neutral and innocent audience members, and media apologists saying they didn't know and/or it doesn't matter ("questions are questions regardless of who asks them") which means they're either incompetent or stupid (or both). It's hard to avoid concluding that the candidates and media must think, first, that candidates won't be able to put their ideas forward without manipulative help and, second, that voters are so naïve and unobservant that they (we) need to be steered and controlled rather than allowed to listen and think on their (our) own.

What is WRONG with people?!? Why are so many people in the world absolutely stark-raving nuts?

Labels: headlines, modern culture, reflections, ridiculousness

Rats. Meant to get home at a reasonable time tonight (before 8:30) but didn't, again. I wish I could figure out how to make a living without doing a lot of overtime.

Labels: about me, work

Four issues are in focus because of this season's DWTS. They're relevant to any reality show that counts viewers' votes.

1/ Should a winner be the best or the most improved (i.e., the least trained before the show begins)? In other words, should the contestant win who is most improved or should the contestant win who does the best regardless of whether he/she has experience (perhaps even professional experience)? This season, for example, should Mel or Helio have won? Everyone agrees that Mel was the best dancer and that Helio was the most improved. Who should have won?

2/ Should there be some way to correct it if something utterly insane happens and/or mistakes were made? Project Runway last season had one week when they voted no one off because it was evident that something had gone wrong. This season, when Sabrina and Mark were voted off, it seems highly likely that something went wrong with the phones because so many people said they got busy signals for hours. Mistakes do happen and corrections should be allowable.

3/ Should judges be required to use all the numbers or at least not only eights, nines and tens? For example, it was patently ridiculous that doll-maker-and-singing-family-member-Marie earned nines and even, heaven help us, tens when she was clearly on the four or five level. The fact that the judges suddently and finally remembered the number seven during the final night made it all the more apparent that they had ignored the 0-10 scale until then.

4/ Should judges' opinions count for (a) more than, (b) as much as, or (c) less than voting viewers'?

Labels: modern culture, silliness, tv

Amazingly, the doll-maker-strangle-hold-vote-getter did not win. Either the voters got with the program or the producers decided to exercise their behind-the-scenes power (I mean, who'd know and/or who'd stop them?).

In any case, Helio won!! It's undeniable that Mel Brown was the superior dancer, actually an extraordinary dancer and personality. She has style and charm beyond belief! Among other things, she made the - let's admit it - occasionally ridiculous ballroom moves look simply wonderful. But Helio won! Partly because he had never danced before and managed to learn to dance amazingly, and partly because he simply exudes such enormous charm and excitement. And partly because of Julianne Hough who is one of the cutest people ever to appear on television (and she's only 19!), not to mention an exceptionally good choreographer and dancer.

As far as dirt-dishing: first - where did the doll dancer go after she got voted off? For someone who couldn't be silenced for two seconds until then, she just disappeared afterwards. Please tell me she wasn't sulking or brewing up a formal protest. If *that* happens, Sabrina and Mark had better bop her over the head and formally protest on their own. Second - if Mel and Maks don't have something going on, as they say, I'd be stunned. Their -ah- chemistry seemed more than dance partners. Maybe it's like summer stock actors - fall in love for the run of the show and all. Third - did Celine Dion buy all the falls in all the salons in America (except the ones that Samantha grabbed first)?? How else to explain the waterfall of hair? No one on earth has that much tumbly hair, no one. Fourth - I have to admit that Samantha Harris looked amazing in that sparkly black dress. Her baby must miss her since she's obviously been doing nothing but exercise since the birth, but it's very impressive. Finally - Tom B. really is terrific as a host. He can ad lib and yuk it up charmingly and give just the faintest suggestion of risqué without ever going there. And he looked positively blushingly happy after Mel's last kiss, I must say - and who could blame him?!

After the goofy judging (yes, Virginia, there are seven actual numbers before 8, 9 and 10), the strange voting, and the endless persistance of the doll person whose nether parts showed way too often in ridiculous so-called dance moves, I was all set to boycott the show in the future, but I'm a fan all over again after last night. Now if Mel Brown would only get her own show or something so I could watch and/or listen to her without the rest of the Spice Girls.

Labels: fun, tv

Hard to believe this is the finale night of the fifth season of Dancing With the Stars. It's definitely been the most amazing season as far as talent, not that last night's finale demonstrated anything to that effect. I so hope the Osmond family hasn't juggernauted it so that Marie wins; she's just a tad too weird and a lot too bad a dancer. That doll routine was just crazy - a slightly amusing idea gone terribly, terribly wrong. Clearly, Mel is the best dancer and a wildly delightful personality in the bargain (who knew a Spice Girl was such a gas?!) but she's a pro, basically. In the end, then, Helio deserves the prize in spades. Besides, who can argue with Julianne's utter superiority as a coach and choreographer?! So we'll see . . . about 1 hour and 58 minutes after the show begins. More then.

Labels: fun, silliness, tv

Sorry about the week of no posting. Well, as if anyone noticed or cared, she said flippantly. Anyway, relatively normal life will now resume. Lucky CRRs.

Labels: blogs (mine)

Getting ready to join the others who are going over the river and through the woods to - well, in this case I'm a travelling gramma going to my kid's house, but you get the idea. Anyway, unlikely to be able to post from there, so:

HAPPY HAPPY THANKSGIVING DAY

to any and all CRRs with enormous and heart-felt appreciation for all your thoughts, insight, wit and inspiration to see the world through clear-colored glasses.

Labels: family, holidays, travel

Golly. Read this.

Labels: gwb, politics, reflections

The miniseries, The Amazing Mrs. Pritchard, concluded tonight here in the NY area. It was well written and even a bit thoughtful, so my friend and I enjoyed it over the last few weeks. Jane Horrocks is a terrific actor, as are the others. The ending, however, was appallingly unsatisfying. It isn't real life, after all, so it's really a cheap thing to do to end a show without coming to any real resolution of the many many things that were in motion. You could assume a few things, but you didn't know them - and after all the minute details to which we'd been treated in the lives of these people, a "well maybe this but maybe that" ending just doesn't cut it.

Labels: tv, writing

Even a casual observer of history knows that Winston Churchill was interesting. But it takes alert bloggers, in this case blog friend Laura, to find and cite people like Elizabeth Nel who was Churchill's last wartime secretary. A Canadian, Nel improbably worked with and was devoted to Churchill. She wrote Winston Churchill by his personal secretary, which was published in 1958 and revised this past year and is being republished this month. She is also the subject of this interesting obituary in Friday's U.K. Telegraph.

Learning about otherwise unknown but utterly important and vital people is exactly why there are many devotees of well-researched and well-written obituaries in places like the Guardian, the U.K. Times, the N.Y. Times and others. They present a fascinating and vivid history of the world, one person and one event at a time. Such as Elizabeth Nel.

Labels: books, headlines, history, people

A nice YouTube video about my local bead shop here. It really manages to capture some of the charm of beading in general and this store in particular.

Labels: about me, beading, fun

Hey, no kidding my Inner European is French. Consider that one of the questions asks what your idea of a great night out would be and one of the choices is lots of talking and arguing over coffee. Probably my favorite activities all rolled into one. Please, can I?! Change the evening to wine and opera, and my inner European becomes Italian. Hey, maybe I'm really a Rivieran.... Anyway, it's fun to try and predict and then see.

Smart and sophisticated.
Who's your inner European?

Labels: about me, fun, modern culture

Barb posted a link to this and it's way too much fun to resist putting it here, too. As she says, you can make a snowflake without having millions of pieces of paper all over the place!

Labels: crafts, fun

Pish tush. As others and I myself have noted, the Truth Laid Bear ecosystem is unpredictable, inexplicable and fickle. A few days ago I had soared way up. Today, despite a week or ten days of increased readership and many more comments than usual, my category has slipped by three. It makes no sense and probably I should stop trying to think about it. Competitiveness is probably bad for writing, anyway, even at this mild level.

Labels: blogs (mine), blogs (others'), reflections, silliness

So simple and so much fun. Gather food for people who really need, all the while sitting at your computer and exercising your linguistic muscles. What could be better?! The hunger initiative, www.poverty.com, has set up a Play and Help game (h/t Cornwall Yarn Shop). Click this link or click on the green "Free Rice" button over there on my sidebar to read about it and/or to play. For every word you define correctly(according to their occasionally odd definitions, anyway), 10 grains of rice is donated. It seems implausible that 10 grains of rice would make any difference but if you read the information they provide, you learn that it does. This play-and-help began in early October of this year yet already there have been over 2 billion grains donated by people all over the world playing this game. I have no idea how many grains of rice makes a serving that staves off hunger, but if you're like me, you'll find the game so addictive that you'll personally account for a huge donation, a few thousand before you even realize it. I must say that some of the words are a tad obscure ('tad' meaning possibly unheard of) and some so-called correct answers must be the eighty-ninth alternate meanings, but there's no SAT or Regents score riding on your score, so it's just plain a whole lot of fun. And what a great idea!

Labels: charities, fun

Damages has been renewed for not just one but two seasons. I'm ecstatic. It was one of the best-written, well-characterized and attention-holding shows ever, so that's very happy news indeed. Yeah, okay, it was maybe too violent now and then but so telegraphed that it was easy to hide. The machinations of the wily characters were simply amazing, and every single one of the actors was perfect. Well, with one exception: the husband of the lead woman looked so much like her brother that I kept expecting to learn that they really weren't different characters or that they'd been mistaken for each other in a violent or important way. All that as it may be, any quibbles I had are extremely minor. It's a fantastic show and I can't wait for the second season.

Labels: about me, entertainment, tv

The Costa Book Awards recently conducted a survey to learn which 20 books are the most re-read (h/t Missy):

1. The Harry Potter Series by J.K Rowling 2. Lord of the Rings Trilogy by JRR Tolkien 3. Pride & Prejudice by Jane Austen 4. The Hobbit by JRR Tolkien 5. Jane Eyre by Charlotte Bronte 6. 1984 by George Orwell 7. Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown 8. The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe by C. S. Lewis 9. Wuthering Heights by Emily Bronte 10. Catch 22 by Joseph Heller

11. Notes from a Small Island by Bill Bryson 12. To Kill a Mocking Bird by Harper Lee 13. Flowers in the Attic by Virginia Andrews 14. Black Beauty by Anna Sewell 15. Good Omens by Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett 16. The Bible 17. Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy by Douglas Adams 18. Bridget Jones Diary by Helen Fielding 19. Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell 20. Great Expectations by Charles Dickens

I've read 17 - all but #2, #4 and #15, only one time each, however. And I've heard of #15 - have you? I'm surprised that Bryson's book is so popular as to be 11th and in such exalted company. Most make various kinds of sense, especially Catch 22 which is really very funny and spot-on, as they say where this list originated.

Especially Jane Austen. She wrote her books almost 200 years ago! I wonder if she had any idea that her six small, wonderful stories would delight people for so long and so much. Or that the characters and personalities would be so germane all these many years after she drew them and brought them to life. It's times like these that I very much hope there is an afterlife, so that wonderful people like her can see what happens.

The 2007 Costa Book of the Year will be announced in January.

Labels: headlines, writing

Take a few moments to read this article. She should know that the most egregious part of what she's been doing (again) is covering-up and denying - which she should know since she is, after all, the spouse of Bill ("I did not have sex with that woman") Clinton and someone who grew up in the shadow of the Watergate nonsense. Incidentally, for those who think I'm partisan, please note that one of those idiocies is democratic and the other is republican, proving that foolhardy behavior is not the purview of one party or the other. Anyway, blood may be starting to come out of the holes she's been shooting in her feet. A smooth ride to the democratic nomination is now much less of a sure thing due to her arrogance and evident assumption that voters aren't paying attention nor very smart.

Labels: 2008 election, politics

Some of the most enjoyable hours of my life have been spent watching reruns of old Dr. Kildare movies. These black and white films offer amusing stories brought to life by magnificent actors : Lionel Barrymore, Nell Craig, Red Skelton, Walter Kingsford, Lew Ayres and (drumroll, please) Larraine Day as Mary Lamont, Dr. Kildare's love interest and, eventually, wife. Sadly, Larraine Day has died, only a few months after her husband of 47 years (!) (she was also married to Leo Durocher of Brooklyn Dodgers fame, for 13 years). We are very lucky to have many movies of hers to watch whenever we can, all of which are delightful but none more so than the Dr. Kildares - of which there will be a marathon on TCM on November 28th (get out your Tivo's!) (most welome h/t Laura).

Labels: about me, celebrities, movies

There's a radio show on one of the NPR stations in my reception area that's hosted by a political science professor at a local community college. The weekly panelists are editors and writers on local papers in wildly sophisticated places like Albany, New York and Schenectady. With these sterling credentials, I suppose it's no wonder that they are condescending about blogs and their writers. This week, for example, one of the women panelists threw out a comment about how "completely uneducated" and "stupid" blog writers are and therefore how appalling and horrifying it is that so many people are getting their news from blogs. The others murmured their agreement and tsk tsks in the same tone that they might use if a two hundred year old man started giving opinions on macroeconomics.

Obviously not all of anything is going to be top notch. And it's equally obvious that not all mainstream media is well thought of, let alone tolerable these days, let alone smart or written by well educated writers (to use the same two criteria they were using). And the comments were wildly broad generalizations which almost inevitably are going to be false simply because they're so broad. Much more alarming, however, is that mainstream media editors and writers can be so blind to the enormous energy and creative ideas that many blog writers exude. And that everyone loses when the information highway has so many front-end collisions littering its roadbed.

Labels: blogs (mine), blogs (others'), headlines, writing

During a long rambling conversation today, a parent mentioned something interesting. Apparently (heh) he has always felt an intense connection with one of his children that has been closer and more enduring than with his other offspring. He asked whether others in the room had had similar experiences. Everyone was reluctant to answer, presumably because we all believe - to the degree of conviction - that one does not and, indeed, must not favor one child over another. I suppose we've all felt more simpatico with one or another child at different times but that's not the same thing, having more to do with interests and activities. And we've probably all known parents who seemed to have favorites, but I'd never heard a parent acknowledge such feelings or explain them quite like this. I do wonder what one would do in such a situation? I mean, people can't deny how they feel. A parent can be absolutely sure that all actions are equal (gifts, time spent, etc.) but connectedness and passion are almost impossible to hide, avoid or see, for everyone involved. What could one do?

Labels: children, family, reflections

Although I absolutely honor and respect the military - without whom there would be no peace or freedom because human nature is so idiotic so often - I also yearn for the peace and decency that idealism makes one think is possible. Folk music has often championed international and human peace, sometimes with a gentle touch that seems almost onomatopoeic. So, today, Veterans Day, JMBM brings you a lovely recent performance by Cat Stevens of his marvelous Peace Train (h/t Music and Cats, one of my favorite blogs). Steven's voice was and still is one of the most infectious ever, and I really love this song. Most happily for us all, Stevens has decided that he should not remain in hermit-like remove. Anyway, take a moment to listen, today especially. It's a real pleasure to hear. And its message to celebrate.

Labels: anniversaries, modern culture, music, people

I'm in the middle of a 3-day beading class taught by a jewelry designer with a national reputation and clientele. She takes it all very very seriously, the process and the product one produces. She seems very Type A and a bit tightly wound, but perhaps one doesn't rise to the top without taking oneself and one's work a bit [too] seriously.

I have often said how very grateful I am to the fates or gods or whoever is in charge of such things that they led me to my jewelry/beading store instead of any of zillions of others. The owner somehow manges to balance fun, creativity and professionalism with precision and detail, all with a charming and light touch, and with respect for everyone. When customers or students ask questions about color or method, she willingly makes suggestions though she always adds that "you should do what you'd like - it's a matter of personal choice." She never objects or takes it personally if someone chooses A or B instead of C or D, or doesn't agree with her suggestions. An amazing trait for anyone in any circumstance, let alone someone teaching the skills and techniques in question, and selling relevant tools and materials. While her taste is impeccable and she always encourages good technique even if people are doing the work totally casually (as opposed to with an eye to making saleable pieces), she never imposes her taste, choice or opinion on anyone. She's marvelous. I am very grateful that she was my first beadwork and jewelry instructor and now is my advisor and friend.

Labels: about me, crafts, jewelry

It's good to see U.S. relations with France and Germany improving so much recently. Refreshingly, Angela Merkel and Nicholas Sarkozy seem to enjoy and respect GWB. Sarkozy's speech to Congress on Wednesday was downright positive and warm, renewing "the renew the pact of friendship" between France and America, as were Bush's words to him at the White House reception and dinner. Things ebb and flow in many aspects of life and foreign relations seems to be one of them. There was Blair in Britain and now there is Brown whose less telegenic self is less friendly to the U.S. though not as hostile as some suggest. There was Chirac in France and now there is Sarkozy whose slightly less smooth self is far friendlier to the U.S. There were two German chancellors and now there is Merkel whose natural, relaxed and self-assured self is far friendlier to the U.S. It's all a bit Mark Twain, isn't it? His weather prediction for New England was, if you don't like the weather just wait a few minutes and it'll be something else.

Labels: gwb, headlines, politics

Laura reports that the Bob Newhart Show will be released on DVD. It ought to debut on February 29th, to be amusing, but Season One is scheduled for release on the 26th. The only thing that would please me more as far as Newhart goes would be a DVD of his telephone calls from Sir Walter Raleigh to Queen Elizabeth I.

Labels: silliness, tv

Two cool things about me me me. One is that, inexplicably, my level has risen to "adorable little rodent" in the Truth Laid Bear categorization hierarchy. There's been no marked increase in readers nor any other obvious change that I can identify, but it's fun to zoom up the ladder even if only for a short while. The other is that I finally have figured out how to lay out this page so things don't overlap wildly when it's reduced or expanded within reasonable limits. Maybe after three years I've finally learned something constructive (heh) about page design.

Labels: about me, blogs (mine), web design

Apparently it was dramatic - dare I say it was astonishing and gorgeous, as a matter of fact - but it was not particularly life-threatening. The high tides and gigantic waves in Great Britain. Check out the photos for breath-taking sights including a foolhardy surfer (is that a tautology?).

Labels: U.K., weather

Apparently there is a tidal wave alert along some coastline areas of Britain. Sure sounds extraordinary but something similar happened in the mid-fifties, and milder versions have occurred now and then since then. Coastal areas are always dangerous when winds and rain combine just right (a/k/a wrong). The Thames Barrier has huge (and, one hopes, highly effective) structures for just such moments, so one wishes them all the best.

Labels: headlines, weather

There is a community of journalists, scientists, educators and ordinary people called ICECAP (International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project). In an article published there yesterday (h/t Newsbusters via Laura), John Coleman, the founder of the Weather Channel, wrote an article in which he sweepingly excoriates the global warming crisis and calls it a scam in which "some dastardly scientists with environmental and political motives manipulated long term scientific data to create in [sic] allusion of rapid global warming." He goes on to say that "huge research grants" were steered the way of these scientists in order "to keep the movement going" and soon "they claimed to be a consensus." He adds that "their ridiculous manipulated science has been accepted as fact and become a cornerstone issue for CNN, CBS, NBC, the Democratic Political Party, the Governor of California, school teachers and, in many cases, well informed but very gullible environmental conscientious citizens. Only one reporter at ABC has been allowed to counter the Global Warming frenzy with one 15 minutes documentary segment." To be honest, I found myself cheering as I read this, because I have wondered if there wasn't room in the media world for letting a few people speak who think that climate change is a naturally occurring phenomenon, not a quasi-religious matter requiring panic and hysteria.

By the way, lest we think Coleman is simply a flatfoot Luddite denier, he is not. His point is that global warming is not the right phrase because it is really "climate change," and perhaps most importantly,

it is not about environmentalism or politics. It is not a religion. It is not something you “believe in.” It is science; the science of meteorology. . . . and natural cycles and drifts in climate are as much if not more responsible for any climate changes underway.

He concludes by saying that he believes "the next twenty years are equally as likely to see a cooling trend as they are to see a warming trend." (I vividly remember people worrying a lot about a coming ice age, and I'm not old enough for that to have been more than 20 or so years ago.) His main and final point is - and I applaud him for saying this and I hope that his credentials will garner his article the attention it deserves - that the sky is not falling.

Labels: headlines, silliness, warming, writing

I've never successfully done intarsia and I'm yearning to do it. As if I didn't want to badly enough already, the current issue of Knit Simple has a pattern for a sheep afghan with sheep and sheepdogs that is incredibly charming and I want to make it! I guess I really need to learn the technique now! If any CRRs have any suggestions for how to smoothly and effectively do that twist that locks the changing yarns so there's no hole, I'd be really grateful!

Labels: about me, children, knitting

After reading Charles Krauthammer's piece (thanks, Laura), I have many thoughts and a couple of important questions. Was the Constitutional amendment that was instituted after FDR's four elections - the one about a person being permitted to be elected no more than twice - not really meant to be as simple and straightforward as it sounds? Does it depend on what the word "elected" means? I thought the whole point was quite simple: no one should be elected to the presidency more than twice, end of story. Thus a vice president who succeeds to the office in some kind of dire situation would be the occasional person in the office for anything just shy of twelve years even though only elected twice. But no one else could be there more than twice.

Then flash ahead to this election cycle and Billary. Were she to be elected, it is altogether implausible that he would say something like "no, no, I can't tell you what I think, dear, as you are president now." In essence he'd be in office too, albeit sideways. The amendment fashioners were hidebound by their own traditions and probably never even thought for a second that they needed to account for the wife of a former president running for president herself but I wish they had. I also sure hope they weren't being crafty and deliberately allowing for what happened in Argentina.

More to the point, it really is a problem. Are the Republicans not mentioning it so as to save the issue for the two-person contest, assuming she wins the nomination? But shouldn't they be hammering at it now?? Or are they afraid it will become a non-issue if they jump on it too soon?

Labels: 2008 election, politics

5:20 MD ran even splits the entire way. How's that for a first-time marathon runner!? And fast enough to get in the NYT the morning after. Yeah!! And though sore, she's elated and loved every minute, she says. What a girl.

1:24 They've talked with lots of finishers and lots of people were recorded before the race. So many fit and enthusiastic people!!

12:35 Some of the 38,000 are coming up 1st Avenue already - very impressive!

Radcliffe was just interviewed and doesn't sound tired at all. Recovers from racing proportionately as fast as from pregnancy, apparently. She loves the New York crowds and even the uphill at the end. Ran 8 marathons, won 7! I've always heard that marathons are good for older people - stamina, emotional maturity, etc. Interesting.

Not much to see, therefore notate, for a while. Hey, MD, cheers to you wherever you are right now!

12:30 They're showing some of the masses, finally. On the other hand, they're saying "now that the race is over" which is nuts. Can't they learn to use precise words like "the elite runners are done" or something like that? Armstrong is still to come in, which will undoubtedly earn some trumpeting, unless he's in bad shape.

12:18 Martin Lel just won the men's race. Another Kenyan wins another marathon. They're fantastic!

The tv guy is praising a Kenyan woman who just finished. How come she's wonderful but the caucasian who came shortly before her is a lagger? Must political idiocy permeate even this?

12:17 The idiot tv guy just said something about the two leaders passing "a woman lagger". LAGGER?!? She's running a sub-3-hour marathon for heaven's sake. How is she a lagger??? Someone please wash his mouth out with soap.

12:15 The top two men are coming into the Park now. They're a lot bigger than some elite marathoners. It's interesting that one of them is holding his arms low and the other's arms are at his chest, in the more familiar stance. Here comes that uphill .2 final push.

12:12 I just realized that the cannon-shot beginning of the race is really not the real beginning. It's only when elite men and common folk begin. Handicapped racers started earlier and elite women began over half an hour earlier. In my perfect world, all elite runners will begin together. Since pacers are part of what pushes them, who knows what time the hotshot women will do when that day comes.

12:00 Radcliffe won the women's race by 23 seconds. Incredible. Just shy of record time. Two awesome women.

Radcliffe is holding her 9-month-old baby. Won a marathon nine months after pregnancy and delivery!?!?!?

Can I just say how annoying those motorcycles must be, zipping back and forth between the runners? One of them was literally only feet behind Radcliffe's heels as she came up to the finish - what is the point of that??

The men look slower than they did, and slower than the women the whole way. What's with that?

11:55 The two moms are crossing Central Park South. The reporters keep saying Wami's never moved into the lead, but I would think this means she's going to sprint at the end - like jockeys do in horse races. Radcliffe has apparently never come in second, but that's because she dropped out or got sick. Hey - Wami's moving into the lead as they move into the Park. Wow. Back in a couple of minutes.

11:45 The men are still running incredibly fast and furious. I don't know how they do it.

Radcliffe and Wami are amazing. Maintaining the link with each other, mile after mile. The reporters are a tad annoying as they predict victory or defeat for either of them depending on two or three feet changing now and then. It's going to be yet another interesting finish for the two of them.

I wish they'd show us the "ordinary" folk, now and then at least. The leads are wonderfully exciting, but there are 15-20 of them and 38,000 of the rest!

MD may be a third through by now, if her regular pace is able to be held in the crowd. She refused to register that chip thing that would allow people to keep track of her, so I won't know anything til it's over. May I just say that swim meets are much easier on parents cuz you can see everything and keep track of everyone?!

11:05 The two lead women are running a record-setting pace, but the two of them look like they're just jogging, since the only comparison is each other.

The handicapped winner in a pushrim crossed the line faster than Clyde Haberman did in on November 1st.

10:35 They're actually interviewing Lance Armstrong while he's running. Why on earth would someone agree to be interviewed while running??! Do elite runners go by that "be able to talk" guide that ordinary runners use? Interesting.

Paula Radcliffe is running hard and out front. She has that weird bob, although she looks fairly relaxed. A few years ago she collapsed quite far into it, so I hope she'll be okay. Gete Wami (only 5' tall!) is fantastic, though. Could be an interesting finish between them.

The elite men, on the other hand, are pounding the pavement and *look* like they're going really hard and fast. Odd, since they're only about 15 minutes faster than the women. Anyway, they look really intense. Even the green-haired guy!

One of my friends talked about taking the subway out to see the runners come into Brooklyn. It's not people-dense at this point, so that would be a good spot, for sure.

10:15 In case you're wondering, my daughter ("MD") wanted to run her first marathon without family spectators so she wouldn't have to think about anything except the race. An athlete has to do their own thing in order to get the most out of the experience, in all kinds of ways.

Labels: family, fun, headlines

Among the 38,000 who just began the race is my daughter. Of course, many won't actually start for another 20 minutes, given the mass of people that move across the Verrazzano. Just think of when a light turns green, how long it takes for the last car to get to move. (Is there a word for this??) When they first held the NYC Marathon, only a few hundred people took part; now there are enough people to populate a medium-size village. Amazing.

It's amazing that so many people set this goal and are now part of this big, wild, energetic event. And I was surprised at how moved I was at the start, knowing my daughter was there. I wish her and the others all the physical and emotional strength and excitement that they richly deserve. Good luck to them all as they engage in their coup d'etat of the amazing City of New York.

Labels: family, fun

For once, birthday-mates make sense: happy birthday today to Kinky Friedman, Larry Flynt and Jenny McCarthy (which must make Flynt happy). Then again, it's also the birth day of Steven Crane (Red Badge of Courage), Sholem Asch, Victoria de los Angeles, Betsy Palmer, and Lyle Lovett, so the astrology thing still makes me wonder if it's all it's cracked up to be.

Labels: juxtapositions, silliness