WI Legislature — Pass April’s Law, Now
Hey, Wisconsin Legislature — it’s time to unite behind a piece of legislation everyone should get behind, “April’s Law,” which will increase the mandatory punishment of sexual offenders (i.e., predators) who commit offenses against children under age twelve. Put your politics aside, and vote for this common-sense piece of legislation. Now.
As to why I feel so strongly about this? My friend, Lika Saliscente, has been working hard to get “April’s Law” passed in Wisconsin for several years now. She runs a non-profit called the Youth Voice Initiative, and recently testified before a legislative subcommittee, the Assembly Subcommittee on Criminal Law and Corrections, in Madison, Wisconsin; “April’s Law” is called that because a little girl named April, who was only six, was raped over and over again, to the point of contracting an STD; the perpetrator only served one year in prison. Ten years later, he was convicted of raping several other children; you can see why, if this violent, disgusting individual had been put in jail for a longer term, it may have done some good in this instance.
“April’s Law” would increase the mandatory minimum sentence from twenty-five years to life in prison to a very simple “life in prison” without any possibility for parole or “early release due to good behavior.” There would also be stricter penalties for adults who are convicted due to possessing child pornography, which is also something I strongly support.
Lika’s story, and push to get “April’s Law” passed in Wisconsin, was recently discussed in the Racine Journal-Times (on the front page in its Monday, October 24, 2011 edition; the online version was published on Sunday, October 23). I urge you to read this important article if you haven’t already, and if it doesn’t make your blood boil, I’ll be quite shocked.
Now, not everyone is behind this law. State Senator Van Wanggaard (R-Racine), has said he does not support this law in the past, to Lika and others; his reasons for not supporting this bill are spurious to the point of ridiculousness. (He was not quoted in the Journal-Times article, and I’ve been unable to gain a response from him regarding this, or any other, issue, which is yet another reason why Van Wanggaard should be recalled and replaced. But I digress.)
Fortunately, Lika’s push to get “April’s Law” passed does have the support of at least two Racine Legislators, Assemblymen Cory Mason and Robert Turner. Here’s what Cory Mason had to say in the recent Journal-Times article:
“She stayed with it,” said Mason, who gives Saliscente credit for the bill now known as “April’s law.” Her bill received a hearing last week before the Assembly Committee on Criminal Justice and Corrections, thanks to the help of Turner, who sits on the committee.
She even helped with multiple drafts of the bill, said Mason, who believes in the importance of the bill.
“Those are horrific crimes and the victims of those crimes deal with the consequences of those crimes for the rest of their lives,” Mason said.
Exactly. Which is why it’s time for the state Legislature to put their politics aside, and pass this extremely important bill. Now.
Because child rape — which is what we’re discussing — is neither a Democratic nor a Republican issue. It’s a human issue. Period.
My Goal for NaNo — Finish “Changing Faces”
Folks, I’m going to set this in stone right now: my goal for NaNo is to finish, for once and for all, my novel CHANGING FACES (a non-Elfyverse spiritual, transgender romantic urban fantasy).
NaNo, for those of you who are new to writing, is National “finish a novel” month — or “write a novel month” if you’re so inclined. Writers are encouraged to write 50,000 words or more on a novel, and some writers work the whole rest of the year setting up what they’re going to write in November because it’s become a very big deal.
Me, I don’t do that — I don’t plan my whole year around November — but I do have this novel, CHANGING FACES, that has been in need of completion for a few years now. What stopped me was this: my husband’s death. That, and only that, has been the main reason CHANGING FACES hasn’t made a whole lot of progress in recent years; I have finished a few more chapters, and am very close to the end, but up until now I haven’t been up to writing the resolution of this novel — how these two lovers, who are transgendered through no fault of theirs (a Deity figure intervened, for reasons that seemed good at the time), manage to become reunited.
Now, there’s a coma involved — body displacement — with only one of the lovers awake and aware (knowing full well he’s in the wrong body, but not knowing why the Hell he’s in this situation), while the other one is speaking with an alien life form inside her own head (but also in the wrong body). In effect, these two lovers have “changed faces” — the man’s in the woman’s body, the woman in the man’s — due to a tumultuous situation that happened long before either one met the other.
For the longest time, I didn’t know how to get these two out of this situation — reversing the “body displacement” won’t work. Having it all be “a dream — a terrible, terrible dream!” (as Pam on “Dallas” said years ago when a whole season was wiped out) — won’t work, either. This has to be “played straight,” or it won’t work at all — and as some of it is really funny, I have to let it play out the way it wants. Not the way I want.
I now have an ending that works — not just the final scene, which I’ve had for years, but the whole ending. I have the additional characters I need. Now I just have to see how it all “plays out,” that’s all.
So that’s my goal — I plan to finish up CHANGING FACES in November. No, it won’t take me 50,000 words to finish it; it might take 30,000. (I am already at 108,000, but I believe a few thousand will go after the final edit.) It will take a lot of time and energy to do . . . but I believe it’s worth it, and I believe the final result will be a positive one, which is why I’m discussing it at all.
So expect some CHANGING FACES updates in November, along with my irregular “Elfyverse” updates (if and when I make any progress in any of the ELFY-derived novels), and of course the usual flotsam and jetsam of my other, non-publishing related posts.
About to watch Game 7 of the World Series
Well, folks, it’s all come down to this. Game Seven of the World Series between the Texas Rangers and the St. Louis Cardinals is about to start, and the clichés will be falling thick and fast, like snowflakes, from television announcers Joe Buck and Tim McCarver.
This is because last night, the Texas Rangers couldn’t hold a 7-5 lead in the bottom of the ninth. They only needed one more strike to get the third out in that inning, yet the Cardinals rallied and tied the game up, 7-7.
The game went to the tenth inning. The Rangers took a 9-7 lead into the bottom of the tenth, but couldn’t hold that lead, either; again, they pushed the Cardinals to needing only one more strike to conclude the game . . . but again, the Cardinals rallied, and tied the game, 9-9, sending the game to the eleventh inning.
This time, the Rangers did not score in the top of the 11th; the Cardinals sent David Freese to the plate, and as he did so often against the Brewers, he got a clutch hit (this time, a home run), which sent this World Series to its concluding — and conclusive — game seven, with history in the making, the game itself in the balance, yadda, yadda, yadda.
I was hoping the game would be over last evening; the Rangers’ manager, Ron Washington, actually pitched to Albert Pujols in the bottom of the ninth inning rather than walk him intentionally — and IMO, that was a really stupid move, because Pujols isn’t a three-time MVP for nothing. Of course Pujols got a clutch hit that extended the game and helped send the game to extra innings; who wouldn’t have predicted that, other than Ron Washington?
Anyway, this series has been marred by some really inexplicable managerial moves on both sides; this is one reason why this series will make history no matter what, though if the Rangers win, they’ll have won their first — and only — world championship, which is one of the reasons I’m rooting more for them than for the Cardinals (though I don’t really have a “dog in this hunt” either way).
So we’ll see what happens in game seven . . . won’t we?
Just Reviewed Martin’s “A Dance with Dragons” at SBR
As the post says . . . I just reviewed George R.R. Martin’s A DANCE WITH DRAGONS at Shiny Book Review. My capsule review is as follows: nearly as good as the first three books in his SOIAF cycle, much better than the fourth book, A FEAST FOR CROWS.
Have at!
Texas Rangers lead in World Series, 3-2; Tony LaRussa’s Mismanagement Steals Show
What would baseball be without a little controversy?
Amidst the Texas Rangers convincing 4-2 win over the St. Louis Cardinals last evening, there were a bunch of odd managerial decisions that made absolutely no sense by Tony LaRussa.
Consider this:
A pitcher, Lance Lynn, was called in to pitch when he’d been told he’d “only pitch in an emergency situation” before the game began. (Lynn walked the only batter he faced intentionally, as once he was in the game, by rule, he had to face one batter before he could be removed.)
The bullpen coach, Derek Lilliquist, didn’t hear the right name when Tony LaRussa had called asking to get bullpen specialist Jason Motte up, which is why Lynn was up and pitching; Lilliquist, inexplicably, heard the wrong name (or at least that’s what everyone’s saying now). That the names “Lynn” and “Motte” do not sound remotely the same makes no nevermind.
And third, because Motte wasn’t up and called in when he was supposed to be, Texas had two guys on rather than one when Rangers’ catcher Mike Napoli came up; Napoli hit a two-run double (when if LaRussa had properly managed to convey that he wanted Motte in there a batter earlier, only one run would’ve scored at maximum rather than two), and that was the ballgame.
Yahoo Sports writer Jeff Passan has an excellent article about this here; for now, I want to give you a few of his thoughts, because I find them both cogent and compelling.
Passan writes:
Seriously, La Russa wants people to believe that he, the most controlling of control-freak managers, would let a failure the magnitude of his best reliever not warming up go by without a trillion precautions to ensure it didn’t happen again? The guy who, when the bullpen phone malfunctioned earlier this year, sent one of his players sprinting from bench to bullpen to relay instructions – he would sit there idly in a swing game of the World Series and leave his chances up to a set of ears on the other end that blew the first conversation?
Inconsistencies between La Russa and Lilliquist’s stories were plentiful enough that it’s impossible to know what is truth and what isn’t. There could be more. Did La Russa forget the number of outs when he walked Cruz? Did he forget to mention Motte’s name on the first phone call? Most important, in what universe does “Motte” sound like “Lynn”? Especially a Lynn who isn’t supposed to throw.
As Passan says, this story doesn’t fly. And quite frankly, it makes me wonder if LaRussa was having a “senior moment” with regards to this huge mistake in judgment, considering the amount of “cover your rear” that’s going on today over it all.
Dancing with the Stars Update: Chaz Bono Voted Off
Folks, I suppose it shouldn’t surprise me any that Chaz Bono was voted off earlier tonight during the “results” portion of “Dancing with the Stars,” but it does sadden me.
As I said last night in this post, I believed Bono wasn’t given enough credit for what he actually did during his tango.
Now, was Bono’s tango with professional dance partner Lacey Schwimmer a flawless dance? Of course not. But it was interesting, entertaining, and I think Bono performed it to the best of his ability.
There were plenty of performances last night that didn’t entertain me half so much as Bono’s, including that of soccer star Hope Solo and her professional partner, Maksim Chmerikovskiy. Chmerikovsky had a well-publicized rant that I won’t reproduce here that went to the effect that Solo is being asked to do more than “other contestants, who are only judged on effort” (Chmerikovskiy said this tonight during DWTS, which is why I was able to reproduce it nearly word-for-word) — more or less calling out Chaz Bono and possibly Nancy Grace, as Grace has to be the worst dancer left now that Bono is gone (Grace also has half the charm and less than half the personality of Bono; what she does have is a cute partner, Tristan MacManus, though Schwimmer is a beautiful woman and has a following of her own due to several seasons on DWTS and a season on “So You Think You Can Dance” years ago).
I chose to focus on Bono rather than Chmerikovskiy’s rant because to me, as a performer, what Bono was going through was obvious. He had just done his best; it wasn’t perfect, but he did something way outside his comfort zone, and aside from his partner Schwimmer (and maybe the rest of the cast, who all seemed to love Bono like he was a long-lost brother), Bono got no appreciation for it. That judge Bruno Tonioli called Bono a “cute little penguin” didn’t sit well with Bono, as we saw during tonight’s results episode, where some of the “behind the scenes” stuff from last evening was played — Bono said that he was tired of being called “some fat troll who’s dancing with the beautiful girl” (referring to his partner, Schwimmer, who really is a beautiful woman) and that Tonioli, in particular, kept saying this about Bono.
I know that hosts Tom Bergeron and Brooke Burke-Charvet were worried that Bono would lose it on stage due to how angry he was due to last night’s comments from head judge Len Goodman and Tonioli, but Bono was gracious. He thanked the cast of DWTS; he thanked them for the opportunity, and said that his whole mission was to give others the idea that there could be a “different kind of man,” at which point Schwimmer hooted and hollered in obvious support. (Good for her!)
I think Bono acquitted himself well on DWTS and I really enjoyed watching him dance. I also believe Schwimmer should be commended on three fronts: she helped Bono learn to dance, she helped Bono withstand the criticism of being DWTS’s first ever transsexual contestant, and she was honest with him about his ability and his strengths from the first.
I hope Bono realizes what Schwimmer has done here, as it goes well beyond a teacher who’s proud of her pupil. Schwimmer actively supported Bono and treated him just like any other guy; she saw him as male (which, of course, he is), she saw him as worthy of praise and criticism just like anyone else, and she did what she could to help him withstand the unnecessary criticism she knew he was likely to get from some of the judges.
Now, Bono also made one other point in those revealing “after-the-Monday-dance comments” — he said that the bigger women (referring to Nancy Grace and Ricki Lake) were praised for losing weight, but that his weight loss had gone unobserved and/or uncommented on. Schwimmer definitely seemed to understand this; she’s had large, male partners before (Kyle Massey immediately comes to mind) and she knows from her own father, Buddy Schwimmer, that bigger men can indeed learn to dance and dance very well.
I hope that Bono will take away three things from his DWTS experience:
1) He has made a true friend, Lacey Schwimmer — and her friendship is worth having.
2) He learned how to dance several dances (cha cha, rhumba, tango, samba, quickstep, and one more).
3) He has a winning personality and the ability to persevere amidst a huge amount of psychological and physical strain.
If he keeps all of that in mind and dwells on what he did right rather than the DWTS judges commentary, the world could indeed be his oyster.
WI D Legislators Pro-Jobs; WI Rs Dither; Scott Walker Recall Starts Nov. 15
Last night at the Roma Lodge in Racine, WI, there was a jobs forum sponsored by the Wisconsin AFL-CIO where four state Democratic legislators showed up — Representative Robert Turner (D-Racine), Representative Cory Mason (D-Racine), Assembly Minority Leader Peter Barca (D-Kenosha — also a former United States Representative for district 1, which includes Racine and Kenosha), and Senator Bob Wirch (D-Kenosha). The Democrats listened patiently to the concerns of Racine residents, which included the following comments (pulled from this article from the Racine Journal-Times):
Barbara Rankin of Kenosha, 78, told the four legislators that of the sixty-six people in her family, only four have jobs that pay over $10 an hour. “Jobs shouldn’t be that hard to get,” she said.
According to the Journal-Times article, person after person stood up to talk about their problems with jobs. They mentioned looming cuts to the Racine bus budget, the need for a casino in Kenosha (or something to replace Dairyland Greyhound Park, which closed at the end of 2010), and the need for greater funding for technical colleges, which also got their budgets cut as part of the Scott Walker budget bill earlier this year.
This is why Scott Walker needs to be recalled, folks, in an nutshell; Walker’s done nothing to help Wisconsin workers find jobs for nearly a year, yet he ran on a “pro-jobs” platform. I’m tired of Walker “talking the talk” but refusing to “walk the walk,” and the other Rs in the Legislature are obviously taking their cues largely from him.
Now, what are the other Wisconsin Rs doing in response to this? Not a whole lot. Senator Van Wanggaard, R-Racine, recently killed a bill that would’ve prevented the state’s main utility company (WE Energies) from charging customers for faulty meters, despite this bill being proposed by another member of his own party, Mike Ellis (R-Neenah — also the President of the Senate).
Yes, that’s right — Wanggaard voted against consumers. Against the people of his own district. (Why am I unsurprised?)
Wanggaard has also recently drafted a “jobs bill” — as in, finally in October of 2011, nearly a full year after he was sworn into the state Senate, he’s finally figured out that we’re in a jobs crisis. That the City of Racine, the area he currently represents, has consistently had 13% to 14% reportable unemployment for the past three years or more (those of us working part-time don’t count on that; those of us who’ve fallen off the unemployment rolls also do not count) — of course, Wanggaard will soon represent the counties of Racine and Kenosha, who aren’t doing so bad, due to the 2011 state Legislature’s gerrymandered map; perhaps that’s why Wanggaard doesn’t care too much about the City of Racine as he knows his days as its Senator are numbered?
Now, apparently Wanggaard had this jobs bill on his mind for at least a month, as I was able to find a reference to it back to September 12, 2011. And much of it, I actually agree with (from the Milwaukee television channel’s Fox 6 News report of the same date):
Sen. Wanggaard’s proposal would provide help for hiring. The plan would give businesses a $5,000 tax credit if they hire someone unemployed for more than 60 days and keep that employee for more than a year. Rep. Wanggaard says, “We can’t continue to throw money at things that aren’t working. We’ve got to think outside the box.”
I agree.
Going on, Wanggaard also says that the current situation is “unacceptable.” Again, I agree.
But was he at this jobs forum? No, he wasn’t — and my guess is, he probably did know about it as courtesy invitations usually go out to both sides.
Going back to the Journal-Times article I referenced above, Rep. Cory Mason said this situation is awful:
“It is a sad state of affairs in the United States of America, where you can work full time and still be poor,” Mason said.
I agree, wholeheartedly.
At any rate, the recall of Scott Walker will start on November 15, 2011. I plan to be out there on the first day getting signatures, because I believe Walker has failed — failed on jobs, and failed as a Governor, period.
And while I do not know when the recall of Van Wanggaard will start, whenever it does, I’m going to be right there, too — because to me, it’s flat unacceptable that Wanggaard hasn’t done any better in the ten months he’s had in office to get any new jobs into Racine City (or County).
Performances, Chaz Bono, and DWTS
This week on “Dancing with the Stars,” it was Broadway Week — meaning every star had to do a ballroom dance of some sort to a Broadway song and also put some “Broadway inflection” into his or her routine. Chaz Bono and his professional partner, Lacey Schwimmer, drew the tango — not an easy thing to dance to a Broadway tune — and the theme to Phantom of the Opera.
Now, I’ve written before about my liking for Chaz Bono before; I believe what he’s doing, in being open about his past gender identity struggles and being the first transsexual contestant ever on DWTS, is a very good and empowering thing. I also think that as a heavier person, he dances well and shows that it’s a complete myth that “big people can’t dance.”
His routine tonight to “Phantom” was a tough one; his partner, Lacey Schwimmer, told him early on that he’d have to “step it up” and do more difficult choreography — that the “super-basic” routines he had learned up until now wouldn’t work. (Note that last week’s samba routine was not all that easy; what I think Schwimmer was referring to was the rhumba routine and some of the routines before that, which were at the most basic level.) I think this was difficult for Bono to hear, but he handled it, learned his routine, and performed it well.
Then came the judges, who were more critical than Bono had anticipated (they were about what Lacey Schwimmer expected, though of course I’m sure she’d hoped for better); they said that the role of the Phantom “did not suit” Bono (both head judge Len Goodman and judge Bruno Tonioli said this pretty much word-for-word, while judge Carrie-Ann Inaba said it in a slightly kinder way, referring to the “challenge” of acting a character that is not your own), that the dance of the tango wasn’t fiery enough or precise enough, and that Bono altogether “lacked the sense of menace” that a dance like this requires (Goodman, again). No mention was made of the fact that Bono danced most of the dance in the half-mask of the Phantom; no mention was made that Bono’s movements were sharper and crisper than they’ve ever been, and that the form of the dance was preserved throughout.
As a performer myself (though not a dancer or actor), I’ve been there. So I have some words for Chaz Bono that I hope he’ll heed tonight: “Mr. Bono, please, do not listen to the harshness of these critics. You have to understand that as a performer, not everyone is going to appreciate what you do, and you can’t do anything about that. You can only control what you can do — which you did, as you danced the best I have ever seen you on the entire season of ‘Dancing with the Stars.'”
Or, in other words — I think the critics, while they’re certainly correct about the forms of the dance and maybe had a point about being more emphatic in your movements (the only way you could possibly have been more “menacing,” it seems to me, behind the Phantom’s half-mask, is to be very direct, cutting, and emphatic), are flat wrong about how you danced.
Look. Your partner, Ms. Schwimmer, is correct about the way the judges will act. This is just what they do; some of it is for effect, because they want to make a better show — and some of it is just how they are overall.
Schwimmer knows this; she’s been dealing with these same judges now for several years. All of her training is meant to help you withstand their criticism; she is an exacting teacher, yes, but also a kind and honest one. She isn’t known for cursing or being upset with her pupils, in the main; she’s known for being able to teach anyone — including Steve-O of “Jackass” fame while he was just “getting clean” after finishing up some rehab for alcohol and drug addiction — to the point that her partners actually learn the dances, rather than just the routines.
Do you know what that means? You’ll remember how to rhumba years from now. You’ll know how to do the cha cha cha. You’ll understand the tango, and be able to do it again once you’re off the show — that’s because she does teach the “super-basics” as well as the flourishes a show like “Dancing” requires, because she wants you to understand the dance as well as perform it.
The upshot of all of this, Mr. Bono, is this — it was very hard for me, as a viewer, to watch your face fall once you’d performed your routine to “Phantom of the Opera.” I didn’t like seeing that, because that made me think that you’ve forgotten the most important person in the equation — you — and are basing your opinion of yourself on what other people think rather than what you think about yourself.
Granted, this can be very tough to do as a performing artist. I have been there (I once had someone criticize my oboe playing who had listened to three hundred clarinets in a solo-ensemble music contest; it was the one and only year I didn’t go to the state contest in high school — I was the only oboist this judge heard all day, too, which made it all the more unfair) and I know how difficult it is.
Here’s another example for you: I once had a saxophone lesson when I was going for my Master’s degree where I asked my professor, “Did I do anything right today?”
His answer was, “Of course! But if I don’t tell you what you did wrong, how will you ever improve?” (Note that I was an “older” Master’s candidate, going for my Master’s past age thirty because I believed in myself and felt I still had a chance to improve my playing and perhaps work in my field. I still believe that if my hands co-operate, I will be able to once again get back to where I should be and I really wish to work in my field, which is performing, teaching, and composing music.)
This is why I have great sympathy for you doing something so far out of your “comfort zone,” because you obviously believe it’s the right thing to do.
I think what Lacey Schwimmer is doing by giving you criticism about how to improve your dancing and your overall performance is meant so you can take the criticism, incorporate it into your performance, and become a better dancer. It certainly is not meant to wound you (even though it hurts, and badly, at the time).
As a performing artist (no matter how long I’ve had to be idle due to my carpal tunnel syndrome and other issues), I know that when fifty people compliment you, but one is highly critical, you tend to remember the one person who was so critical like it’s a burr under your skin. I can only imagine what it must be like to hear yourself be criticized like that by three judges on national TV.
I know that I, as a viewer, saw both improvement and personality in your dance. And I believe that as a performer, you did your job, because you did the very best you possibly could — you lived up to everything your teacher asked of you — in the best way you possibly could do it.
So what I’d like most to tell you is this: keep on dancing, Mr. Bono. You’re doing a fine job; you’ve learned a lot; you’ve hung in there and you’ve done everything in your power to improve and you have, indeed, shown improvement. And while your overall likeability is one of your greatest strengths, do you know what your best strength is? Your perseverance.
So keep on keepin’ on, and non illegitimi carborundum.
———
Oh, one other thing: if I listened to “the critics” regarding my saxophone playing (now that I can’t do as much as before, or at least as quickly as before), I’d not even be making the attempt to play. So yes, improvement must be taken into consideration here — which is why every single week, I’ve voted for Chaz Bono and Lacey Schwimmer and it’s why I plan to keep doing so.
When Life Does Not Go As Planned . . . .
Today was one of those days where I’m reminded of the phrase, “Life is what happens when you’re busy making other plans.”
First, my saxophone student’s mother called late to let me know that her son was not feeling well enough to take his lesson. (This happens. I’m just glad she called me before the lesson.)
Second, I was hoping to do something different this evening — something fun, maybe. Something frivolous, perhaps (that is, if I remember how to “frivol,” if that’s even a word). But that was not to be, either.
Today was all about getting work done — or in the case of my saxophone lesson that didn’t come off, being prepared to do the work but not being able to do it. So once again, it’s one of those days where life definitely did not go as planned.
That doesn’t make this a bad day, mind you. But it does make it a somewhat unsettled one.
And hey, at least tomorrow I know I’ll have a bit of down-time as I watch Dancing with the Stars.
World Series Tied, 1-1, and Other Non-Issues
Folks, right now the World Series is tied up at 1-1, meaning the St. Louis Cardinals won the first game, and the Texas Rangers won the second.
Of course, since my Milwaukee Brewers team is out of it, I don’t care that much about the outcome — and I won’t pretend I don’t. The only reason I’m following it at all is that there are at least two ex-Brewers on the Texas roster — those being pitcher Mike Adams and outfielder Nelson Cruz (both were in the minor-league system for the Brewers), and of course the Brewers’ former pitching coach, Mike Maddux, now is the pitching coach of the Rangers.
This reminds me ever so much of something my late husband, Michael, and I discussed years ago. I think we were watching a baseball game in 2003 — not a World Series game, either — and he said, “I remember that guy — he’s a former Giant.”
Not to be outdone, I told him, “Well, that guy over there for the other team” — I forget which teams they were — “is an ex-Brewer.”
Sure enough, we went to look it up, and we found several ex-Giants and ex-Brewers on both teams. That increased our viewing enjoyment in an otherwise mundane experience . . . though mundanity itself can be pleasant, if you have the right person by your side.
Anyway, right now I’m engrossed in another editing project, which takes up a large amount of my thought-space (even when I’m not editing the project in front of me, I’m thinking about it; part of the deal); that’s the main reason I’m not talking about politics (though I will, and soon), more about the Brewers (still deciding what to say about the overall Brewers season), or music (except that I’m glad to be playing, there isn’t much more I can say there right now).
Stay warm, folks.