My father was an acquaintance of Charles Schulz in the 1960s and 1970s. My Dad's kids from his first marriage attended the same grammar school as Schulzs'. At at PTA event, Schulz handed a marker drawn Snoopy original to my father. My father gave it to his son, who--uninterested--left it in the bedroom in our home that came to be my sister's.

So by casual inheritance, we always considered the (growing more valuable, culturally and moentarily) drawing to be my sister's. Later, my older half brother wanted the drawing back. It's 20 years later and as far as I know there are still grudges, resentments, and mild seething anger over this still unresolved issue.

I'm a Minnesotan. We rarely yell, but the anger and resentment and self pity you can feel from folks at home feels more dangerous than the vibe from the hardest looking thugs of the ghetto.

The biographer's description of Charles Schulz as a depressive, collector of invented grudges comes as no surprise to me. In my experience, it's the at-home personality of my home state.

If you're not donating time, family members, money or making some kind of sacrifice--you should not be able to piggy back off the patriotic sacrifice members of the armed forces are making.

I guess that's a limiting of free speech, but I consider it more a limit on lies and hypocrisy.

And blogging does not count.

Unilever's surface hypocrisy as actually balanced by a deeper consistency of corporate responsibility.

A corporation has a responsibility to maximize profits for it's shareholders, period. That means doing everything within its power just inside the law to make money.

No beauty corporation seriously wants to educate women to buy more wisesly. The ad in question is part of a marketing strategy. If education happens, that's fine, but's secondary. It's ultimate goal--you guessed it, sell dove products.

Unilever is not here to educate you about the beauty industry or clear heels or stripper poles or getting lucky or anything. As long as you all remain in that slightly insecure (if you buy Axe, I argue that you are insecure--that sh*t stinks) state that leads you to buy Axe or Dove as opposed to something more healthy, locally made, etc.. Unilever's work is done.

See the documentary: The Corporation.

No matter how hard (not very) I try (not often) I simply cannot keep the domicile as clean and organized as I or a lady would like.

There is simply to much high priority f****** around to do, and not enough time to get to it.

But on behalf of all men, I want to thank the women of America for having an infinitely better bead on the details, for remembering dates and birthdays, for reminding us to pick up this or finish that, and for--since the 1980s--earning like Trumptrixes; and my god are many of you doing it and doing it well. Working, earning, styling, putting out, birthing, mothering and keeping house.

Please join me in a moment of grateful awed silence of the females species.

Thank you.

Just remember the one, three or seven things that we are good for. That's all we ask.

And I would agree that Krugrman is "shrill" if by "shrill" you mean the calm, hushed tone of an on-duty librarian.

And though I've only read Krugman's own summary of the book--it sounds great. I'd buy it if I could afford it.

When I was in junior highschool in Minneapolis in the 80s, a few kids were already having sex. There was a pregnant girl in my class. Even then I thought: we are badder than the last generation and it's cool. But I wondered what it would be like in ten years? If kids would be having sex even younger? And, even then, I knew if I became a parent I would be horrified if that became true.

I've often wondered where it would all stop, because it's so natural for kids to want to out misbehave the older generation. So in the future will we argue about full frontal nudity in the junior high holiday pageant? Oral sex in the high school play? Kama Sutra electives for sophomores?

Maybe women in sheer minidresses at the office are just a few seasons away. What a gorgeous, distracting sight. I can barely walk around New York without smacking into light posts from looking now.

I consider myself a monogamous libertine. I think people should celebrate their sexuality however they want at pretty much whatever age they want, as long as it's not adults preying on kids.

But if I was a parent I would be half-prude. I would not let my 13 year old daughter take pole dancing classes.

Yes, pole dancing for pre-teens is creepy. Jon Benet creepy.

The "scandal" is that Plame was a covert agent (confirmed by CIA superiors) working on WMD proliferation. Kind of important in the days when Cheney was claiming Saddam might make a mushroom cloud over Manhattan. And she was OUTED by Cheney et al for political reasons-- her cover was compromised and thus the cover of her contacts was compromised.

You ask where's the scandal? Try treason.

Imagine if some soldiers on a dangerous mission in Iraq had their position exposed as part of some political payback?

The scandal is today's right wing thinks American laws are to be upheld or broken at their pleasure.

1) Raising taxes in the U.S. is seen by both public and media as an evil one notch below child molesting and exactly even with aborting little fetuses.

2) Democrats will wisely do nothing to alienate the group that, by and large, funds their campaigns. Votes count, but they can be (95% of the time) bought. How many presidential and congressional winners spent only half as much as their opponent to get elected? Maybe Paul Wellstone (D-MN) in 1990. It was a rare event. Almost as rare as his death in a small plane crash just weeks before he would've beat Norm Coleman (R-MN) for re-election.