wait, how do you know? Is this a spoiler?

thanks for casting your interpretations of the Snape issue to the letter writers who did so....I feel dumb, but it never occurred to me that Snape was anything but Voldemort's loyal henchman. I wonder if I missed something in the fifth book that should have clued me in? Now I'm even MORE anxious to get my hands on the last book, because I must get to the truth of the Snape issue!

I don't know why, I just hate it. I guess I could figure it out and explore the reasons behind my dislike, but it doesn't seem worth the effort. Just, yuck. I wish this woman had more important things to think and write about.

I don't know if this has been addressed anywhere (I didn't make it through all the letters) but this boy had roommates. As an upperclassman, it's my understanding (mostly from my own college experience and that of my friends) that you only get 'random' roommates your freshman year. After that, you choose who you want to live with. So, I guess I wonder - were his roommates his friends? the stories all seem to depict them as unfortunates that got stuck with living with him. but if he was a junior, how did that happen?

to the anonymous who claims that "everyone hates weddings" - that's not true. I love weddings. I love being invited and I love going to them. I think it's great when people get married, and I don't judge them for how they do it, either. at a big hotel or in a park, they're always a great time.

I watched the debates last night, I thought that all the candidates were good, but that it was extremely obvious that they decided to chuck the whole facade of an equal debate. There were a couple candidates that didn't even get to respond to a question until about 20 minutes in, after Edwards/Clinton/Obama had answered twice or more. It was obvious that the "fringe" candidates weren't taken seriously, and one of those was Dennis Kucinich. In my opinion, Kucinich is the only candidate that says the right things, consistently, and has for the last 8 years. Again last night, as I was watching, I was reminded of how Kucinich is the only candidate who really seems to beleive in what he says and to reflect what most democrats (at least the ones I talk to) say. But every time I mention this to someone, I hear soemthing like "yeah, I love him, but you can't seriously be for Kucinich. Snowball's chance. Back a horse that could win"

Why? I guess I just want to know why. Some things to think about:

1.) He is the only democratic candidate who voted against the war on Iraq and who consistently opposed it.

2.) He is the only candidate who sued the President to try to prevent him from going to war without a declaration from Congress.

3.) He is the only democratic candidate who will repeal NAFTA and withdraw from the WTO, replacing these agreements that have cost us so many hundreds of thousands of jobs with fair bilateral trade agreements that protect jobs, workers' rights, human rights, and environmental quality principles.

4.) He is the only candidate with a single-payer plan that provides every man, woman, and child with comprehensive health coverage from whatever doctors they choose, and does so through a tax on employers that is lower than what employers who now provide coverage pay on average.

5.) He is the only democratic candidate who voted against the "Patriot Act" and who has introduced a bill to repeal major sections of it.

6.) He is the only candidate who will redirect our priorities from war and tax cuts for millionaires to peace and education, including free college tuition.

7.) He is the only candidate who will make 20 percent of our energy use renewables rather than fossil fuels by 2010.

8.) He is the only democratic candidate who will focus on breaking up monopolies, including agri-business monopolies and media monopolies.

So why is he such a marginal candidate?

I saw the preview, and I said to my husband "I can't believe they've never made a Nacy Drew movie before!" It's surprising, but somehow, I wish they had left Nancy Drew alone. I loved these books so much as a kid - I think I'd avoid the movie just because it might ruin the memory. It's not like Harry Potter - I liked the books and the movies - but I think that's because I read the books as an adult. Watching the movie didn't tamper with childhood memories. I'm sure the movie is good - I just don't want to see it. I'd rather keep my memory of "The Secret of the Old Clock".

To the anonymous that posted the list of things "most" of the guests are supposedly thinking at a wedding - that's awful. Are you that much of a misanthrope? I've never had anything close to a thought like that at a wedding. And most of the people I see at weddings seem genuinely pleased to be there. Most of the weddings I've been to in the past year have been loads of fun - a chance to see people I haven't seen in ages, to have some free drinks and a nice dinner, (save your complaints about how *terrible* wedding food is. It falls on deaf ears here because it's almost assuredly better than the lean cuisine or bowl of cereal I'd be having at home) put on a nice outfit and dance with my husband. I guess my question is, if you hate weddings that much, why would you go to one? You're just contributing to the waste by making the hosts pay for your dinner.