which makes me feel good, even thought there is now snow on the ground. i don’t know anybody who isn’t totally totally sick of winter. randy said again that he’s NOT LIVING HERE WHEN HE’S OLDER. i assured him that we’ll all move someplace warm.
i’m ok inside with my multiple cups of tea, but i have to go out soon, which will first involved shoveling snow off the car. that will be followed by trying to drive the minivan down our street which is never plowed. if i didn’t have to go out, i could spend the day right here in my chair.
yesterday i was all fired up by two columns in the springfield paper, but then we found out that our internet service provider was being switched RIGHT THEN. they had sent an e-mail saying they’d tell us when it was going to happen, but when we tried to turn on our computers we suddenly had to CHANGE IT ALL RIGHT NOW. it ended up being a big pain, involving calling the new provider a few times, turning things on and off, kevin changing the settings on the router, on and on and on, not to mention all the accounts that i switched from the one e-mail to the other. i’m sure i didn’t think of all of them.
the annoying thing is that we had no choice in all of this; the provider (insight) was bought by comcast, so we had to switch whether we wanted to or not.
but here’s a little bit about those two columns yesterday – first, ellen goodman from the Washington Post tried to make the claim that Poor Hillary just can’t win because she’s a woman, and that barack is somehow stealing all the “woman traits” of reaching out to people instead of being in a “typical male” attack mode. she doesn’t see that we want barack because of who he is, and if hillary was a man she’d be just as uninspiring. hmm, if she was a man, married to bill…that would certainly change the dynamics of everything, wouldn’t it? i guess if she and bill were married but both men, then we would have all been spared the monica lewinsky debacle, wouldn’t we? instead maybe it would have been mike lewinsky.
but i digress. what i really wanted to point out is george will’s column. he talks about hillary’s constant harping on all her vast experience. he writes:
The president who came to office with the most glittering array of experiences had served 10 years in the House of Representatives, then became minister to Russia, then served 10 years in the Senate, then four years as secretary of state (during a war that enlarged the nation by 33 percent), then was minister to Britain. Then, in 1856, James Buchanan was elected president and in just one term secured a strong claim to being ranked as America’s worst president. Abraham Lincoln, the inexperienced former one-term congressman, had an easy act to follow.
take THAT, hillary.
and now i go shovel snow.
ok then, happy friday,
perpetually cold grace