This is why I read Cary Tennis.

Sometimes he just comes out of left-field and actually suggests that a parent, or their partner, ought to put their kids first. Ought to try to empathize with just HOW DAMN PAINFUL it is to go through your parents divorce. Then to watch your parent(s) adjust their life afterwards to suit the needs/wants of a new spouse, watching them make changes and compromises that they would never make for you, realizing that this new person comes first in spite of the fact that you're the one who shares half a genetic code, who depends on them utterly, who has the real claim. It truly feels catastrophic for the child(ren).

Thank you for speaking up for children Cary.

...I don't normally need to have my tastes validated by t.v. reviewers, and I guess I didn't in this case either, but it's comforting to know that I'm not the only one who finds this season's line up of new shows blah(say).

With the exception of True Blood, that is, which has all the campy charm that Anne Rice's books could have had but missed by going too goth. Plus, I love Anna Paquin, who proves that there is room for different, and sometimes peculiar acting chops on prime-time. Her line delivery is a bit bizarre, but she is fully committed, and totally looks the part of the sulky yet bodacious Ms. Stackhouse. And she proves once again that, where the ideas and writing are good, there's no shame in movie-actors doing television.

Plus, I can't think of too many shows that combine genres so well; it's got all the lurid pleasures of soft-core porn, murder-mystery, monster theatre, and southern gothic. A glass of wine and some popcorn please!

I am in Toronto, I work on Bay Street in corporate law (for the now!) and I have a heavy day with a half-dozen deadlines coming up. Meanwhile, all I can think about is this monumentally importaint election. It's important for Canadians, as we take many of our political queues from the US, but mainly it's important for Americans, many of whom are really decent people and who have endured eight painful years of anger and embarassment. It is time for a change.

To all the readers of Salon who have talked, wrote, read, analyzed, pontificated, volunteered, activated, generally struggled towards this day, I salute you!

From Canada with love:

Barack Obama is an inspirational, transformational candidate. He won't be perfect, and he won't be able to fix the mess y'all are in, but he is a symbol, an olive branch, a sign of sanity, that will bring other countries back to the table. This election sends a message that the citizens of the United States are ready to deal with reality without sacrificing hope. I am so happy for you. And for us.

Or rather the two points:

1. Rahm is supremely competent.

2. In spite of his reputation as a ball-buster, he does not alienate members of his team.

He may be tough as nails and reputedly a bit histrionic (I'm thinking of the knife in table, die, die, die incident), but he is excellent at what he does and he brings out the excellence in others. There is room for different personality types and styles, we don't all have to be golden mellow. Rahm is effective and he's no sociopath, so don't compare him to Cheney.

Thank you,

I love that album.

A

You said: Imagine if Jo Rowling had been employed as a computer programmer when she came up with Harry Potter, writing notes on a pad at her desk while she wrote code to pay the bills. Ethically speaking, should an employer in that circumstance, faced with an employee with a blockbuster creative work, be allowed to claim it owns the work in question?

Me: An interesting question, and I'm pretty sure Jo Rowling wouldn't have to turn over her billions to the ex-employer. The real issue would be if Jo Rowling were working as a programer, on the employer's time, and her job was to design new programs, and she designed a new program, and it was sooo good, that she walked out the door with it. If Carter was being paid by Mattel to devlop new lines of dolls, and, while on the clock, he did do his job and designed a line of dolls, then arguably, it belonged to Mattel.

Don't get me wrong, besides understanding the logic, I'm with Brightstar II (I never thought I'd type those words!) Except I hate Bratz. I have no feelings about Barbie, except I used to love playing with her hair when I was a kid, but I frakin hate Bratz, with their fish-lips, big retarded looking eyes, they're a cross between pamela anderson and strawberry shortcake.

Sorry, I didn't read all of the letters, which I really should do before I post.

Thank you. I have adored RDJ for ages, and he went off my radar than flew back onto it this last few years. He is simply, absolutely gorgeous. He burbles with electic, acidic, crunchy energy. He's flaky, you just know it, but so, so smart and strangely innocent. Talented in spades.