our fiscal mess explained

Bitch Ph.D. has a good post up from her BritFriend, explaining our current fiscal crisis. I'd write about this more but, lately, my reaction has been to confusedly pray I don't lose my non profit job, begin brainstorming a move back to corporate for a bigger paycheck and more stability (yeah, right), begin looking for a sweet but not too bright Sugar Person.

Update: Bailout a No Go!

...And, stocks plunge.

Niice.

[House Rejects Bailout - NYTimes.com]

shorter bailout blame: The Brown People Did It! and what i'm reading this morning

It is a truth universally acknowledged (among Republicans) that when the economic shit hits the fan the one holding the shovel is most likely a low-income person of color.

So it is with this bailout mess. Now that the package has been approved, all eyes are looking for a scapegoat. Surprise, surprise, the luminaries on the Right have lit upon their various whipping persons: people of color, poor people, affirmative action, immigrants and even the nice fuzziness of multiculturalism.

You can catch reaction to this line of spin at Feministe and Ta-Nehisi Coates, whose thread includes a very good parsing of CRA lending policy.

(No, I'm not going to link to Malkin, Coulter or Sailer. You can Google them yourself and gag in the privacy of your own desk.)

Of note is Tim Wise's essay that not only takes this line of thinking to task, it also pokes some holes in the 'personal responsibility' canard the Right is so fond of trotting out:

So there you have it: white conservatives who simply cannot bring themselves to blame rich white people for anything, and who consistently fall back into old patterns, blaming the poor for poverty, black and brown folks for racism, anybody but themselves and those like them. That anyone takes them seriously anymore when they prattle on about "personal responsibility" is a stunning testament to how racism and classism continue to pay dividends in a nation whose soil has been fertilized with these twin poisons for generations. Unless the rest of us insist that the truth be told--and unless we tell it ourselves, by bombarding the folks who send us their hateful e-mails with our own correctives, thereby putting them on notice that we won't be silent (and that they cannot rely on our complicity any longer)--it is doubtful that much will change.

When conservatives say things like 'Oh, if only those darkies hadn't whined about equal access and equal opportunity, we wouldn't be in this mess!' I realize that there is a huge gulf between us that will never be bridged.

Conservative anger always seems to float downward, blaming people who always get the shorter end of the privilege stick; my anger floats up. I'm not going to blame the folks who use pay day loans to make their tiny paychecks last a little longer; I'm gonna look fish eye at the greedy white-collared sonofabitch who calculated that he could fleece more sheep by putting a pay day loan office on every corner in the south side.

I know, very noblesse oblige of me. But it's not, really. It's called freaking compassion!

...

I'm working on a complicated piece I've been wanting to write about intentional motherhood so I've been snapping up essays on motherhood, birthing and contraception. This is one linking increase demand for food and family planning.

This is also one about black midwives fighting the AMA for the opportunity to provide black maternal care.

And, of course, the asshat from Louisiana who thought it was a good idea in a brainstorming session to throw out 'sterilize black women' as a way to combat poverty. Uh-huh. No, that's not racist or problematic as shit at all.

Oh, and then there's this - it only took one month for the bloom to be permanently rubbed off the rose. (Yeah, there are huge problems if Parker thinks Palin is a picture of modern feminism but to get a huge, horking female conservative to admit Palin was a bad pick? I'll gloat.)

And here - a third party (who??) solution to the economic crisis at hand from Cynthia McKinney (via Alas, a Blog.)

Get to reading!

shorter bailout blame: The Brown People Did It! and what i'm reading this morning

It is a truth universally acknowledged (among Republicans) that when the economic shit hits the fan the one holding the shovel is most likely a low-income person of color.

So it is with this bailout mess. Now that the package has been approved, all eyes are looking for a scapegoat. Surprise, surprise, the luminaries on the Right have lit upon their various whipping persons: people of color, poor people, affirmative action, immigrants and even the nice fuzziness of multiculturalism.

You can catch reaction to this line of spin at Feministe and Ta-Nehisi Coates, whose thread includes a very good parsing of CRA lending policy.

(No, I'm not going to link to Malkin, Coulter or Sailer. You can Google them yourself and gag in the privacy of your own desk.)

Of note is Tim Wise's essay that not only takes this line of thinking to task, it also pokes some holes in the 'personal responsibility' canard the Right is so fond of trotting out:

So there you have it: white conservatives who simply cannot bring themselves to blame rich white people for anything, and who consistently fall back into old patterns, blaming the poor for poverty, black and brown folks for racism, anybody but themselves and those like them. That anyone takes them seriously anymore when they prattle on about "personal responsibility" is a stunning testament to how racism and classism continue to pay dividends in a nation whose soil has been fertilized with these twin poisons for generations. Unless the rest of us insist that the truth be told--and unless we tell it ourselves, by bombarding the folks who send us their hateful e-mails with our own correctives, thereby putting them on notice that we won't be silent (and that they cannot rely on our complicity any longer)--it is doubtful that much will change.

When conservatives say things like 'Oh, if only those darkies hadn't whined about equal access and equal opportunity, we wouldn't be in this mess!' I realize that there is a huge gulf between us that will never be bridged.

Conservative anger always seems to float downward, blaming people who always get the shorter end of the privilege stick; my anger floats up. I'm not going to blame the folks who use pay day loans to make their tiny paychecks last a little longer; I'm gonna look fish eye at the greedy white-collared sonofabitch who calculated that he could fleece more sheep by putting a pay day loan office on every corner in the south side.

I know, very noblesse oblige of me. But it's not, really. It's called freaking compassion!

...

I'm working on a complicated piece I've been wanting to write about intentional motherhood so I've been snapping up essays on motherhood, birthing and contraception. This is one linking increase demand for food and family planning.

This is also one about black midwives fighting the AMA for the opportunity to provide black maternal care.

And, of course, the asshat from Louisiana who thought it was a good idea in a brainstorming session to throw out 'sterilize black women' as a way to combat poverty. Uh-huh. No, that's not racist or problematic as shit at all.

Oh, and then there's this - it only took one month for the bloom to be permanently rubbed off the rose. (Yeah, there are huge problems if Parker thinks Palin is a picture of modern feminism but to get a huge, horking female conservative to admit Palin was a bad pick? I'll gloat.)

And here - a third party (who??) solution to the economic crisis at hand from Cynthia McKinney (via Alas, a Blog.)

Get to reading!

The Debates!: Get it On!

I'm sitting here, with my girls and amid a fab spread of cheeses, pate and chips/dips (as well as a hell of a lot of beer), watching the debate. And we're taking a drink everytime we hear the words: war, POW, Main Street, and hope. We won't get as plowed as watching the Orientalizing opening cermonies of the Olympics, but maybe we'll get a nice buzz on.

Consider this your space to share your thoughts, reactions, funny asides and observations during this debate.

Carry on!

[I've also opened a thread at Bitch, PhD if you wanna take part over there.]

happy (39th) birthday to me.

Birthday resolutions:

Birthday resolutions:
Stop smoking. I had no idea the cigarette I had when I got home on Tuesday night, exhausted, would be my last. Now I know.
Exercise more. Yes, I've internalized our culture's messages about age and beauty and I refuse to be the dumpy, cute, near-40 year old.
Stop procrastinating. Feh, maybe tomorrow.
Be mindful.
Go to church more. (see Procrastinating)
Get more sleep.
Eat more salads - or at least alternate them with the bags of Doritos I love.
Find a tailor. (see Salads and Doritos)
Be open.
Make an effort.
Call the family more often, for god's sake!
Get regular Paps. And get on the mammogram tip, too.
Finish Worst Romance Novel Draft #1 by New Year's. Then sell it and begin to stalk Eloisa James because she is my hero.
Write more. Write better.

student voting: a handy legal guide

[crossposted at Bitch, Ph.D.]

So I'm at work, trying to put together communications for GOTV and I am realizing that there is a huge gap in my knowledge re: the voting process for students. I know the rules for early voting, absentee voting and registering and what to do if you're challenged at the polls here in Illinois, but what about for students?

Everyone I've spoken to has drawn a blank when I try to develop a guidesheet for students voting in this election. The best I can come up with is, 'Uh, be familiar with the laws of the state you're going to school in or, uh, vote absentee.'

Not good enough. I had no idea there were so many barriers to student voting - and it's no wonder that previous elections have seen younger voter turnout remain so flat. We make it virtually impossible for them to vote!

Some states have flat out refused to recognize students' residency as valid (hello, Texas, Virginia and New York); some states don't recognize student IDs as valid identification, making it impossible for students to comply with HAVA (Help America Vote Act) guidelines; some states require drivers licence addresses to match voter registration card addresses, which unfairly burden students from another state; and then there are those state officials who claim that students voting where they go to school could endanger financial aid or scholarship awards.

So what are the rules? Where can student voters go for clean information?

Thank goodness I didn't have to do much legwork.

The Brennan Center has developed a web tool that provides a handy legal guide for students during this election year. They code states according to how student-voting friendly they are - green is friendly, red is not. (Just guess which states aren't friendly.) They give you what the regulations are and what maze of red tape you'll have to navigate to come out the other side. They also dispel all the myths WRT losing financial aid, imperiling parents' taxes and endangering tuition.

The guide does not say that students merely have to show up to vote, but helps prepare students for whatever bullshit their state throws in their way. Forewarned in forearmed.

So, professors and grad student instructors, or anyone who knows a college student voter who's fired up - do your students a solid and tell them about this guide so they can prepare themselves for what they need to do to vote without too much issue. They don't have a lot of time.

Updated: to add that Jack (from Jack & Jill Politics) has created a Voter Suppression Wiki. They have an action page that is pulling information together from voter suppression watchgroups, contact information to report irregularities, different campaigns and legal actions already in progress to halt voter suppression.

being busy - and being invisible at church

good gracious!
this week has been a little bit full.

had a date on monday (went well), worked furiously to get ready to leave town for a conference meeting on tuesday, was in indianapolis on wednesday for my meeting, flew back, worked furiously on thursday to catch up and now - hey! more working furiously while also getting ready for a church retreat over the weekend, a birthday party and maybe a tennis date.
...

speaking of church, here's a little story i haven't had a chance to share. it reminded me that, as progressive as my congregation is, it has a LOOONG way to go to recognize something that Macon D over at Stuff White People Do has written about here and here. (And has posted a fine analysis of non-white reaction to what white people do here.)

i was with some church folks at a farewell reception for a church colleague. most of the people there were from Session, some i recognized from my years as Deacon, and some from my position as board member on the non profit organization housed at the church. in other words, these were not complete strangers to me.

but as the cocktail party wore on, it became clear that people did not recognize me to the same extent that i recognized them.

little old white ladies rushed up to me and cooed, 'oh, stacy! it's so good to see you here!' repeatedly, they did this - even after someone else had introduced me as 'Ding,' member of the Such&Such Board. oh, the stiff smile i'd wear as their eyes would blink and flutter and i could see their confusion, which probably sounded a little like this:

'what? but - but - stacy is The Black Girl! this is a Black Girl, so...this must be stacy! but she says she's not stacy! but she must be! why isn't she stacy?!'

sigh.

when i put in my requisite 90 minutes of cocktailing, i sat in the lounge area to check my messages on my cell phone. a man from the reception came up to me, hugged me and said, 'oh, stacy! it was really good to see you tonight!'

i had been standing next to this man when the departing executive director of our organization publicly thanked me for my service on the board - and said my name.

flatly, i said, 'i'm not stacy.'
he said, 'oh.' silence. uncomfortable silence as i stared at him, with my cell phone in my hand. i was not smiling.

he said, 'well, it was good to see you.' and rushed away while i really tried not think bad thoughts about white people - and failed.

who is stacy? stacy is the african american woman who runs the very successful tutoring and mentoring program at our church. stacy and i look nothing alike.

and, clearly, the white people i serve with at church think she and i are exactly the same person. this is not the first time this has happened to me. at our mission benefit, at a board dinner, and during coffee hour while i stand at our organization's table during a fundraising campaign - i am every other black woman in church except who i really am.

do white people really not see the differences between us? do we really blur and blend into indistinguishable shapes? are we just all brown and black and yellow blobs that float indistinctly in and out of white vision?

this is the kicker: not one person apologized for mistaking me for stacy. not a single word of apology passed their thin, christian lips.

ugh. this week is going to blow.

With my luck, all sorts of fascinating things will happen this week in the world of politics. Perhaps, if the universe has any sense of justice, the Palin non-interview with Charles Gibson will alert the electorate to how ignorant she is and unqualified for any higher office governing a populace larger than 900.

But, alas, I'll be traveling for work this week and today is all about getting the hell out of town while also going on a date, doing a couple of work meetings and scheduling interviews for my potential replacement at the office.

Geez. I don't think there's enough caffeine for this week.

neat: ObamaTaxCut.com

so you think Obama will raise your taxes under his plan?
well, i don't want to call you misinformed but you might want to go here: ObamaTaxCut.com

it's sort of neat.

down the rabbit hole

via pandagon.net:

McCain/Palin announce truthiness squad to 'set the record straight' on 'attacks' on Palin.

Uh, whatever, gramps.
I'll believe your 'truth' as soon as y'all clear up that whole bridge thing and put her in front of some real journalists to answer questions.
...

you know what the Republican campaign reminds me of?
it's like when you played baseball in grade school and the person at bat wasn't really a good runner so they'd hit the ball and then someone else would run the bases because they ran faster and they'd get the run!

what's that called?

cheating?
no...that's not it.

bait and switch?
no, that's not it, either.

bullshit?
closer.

rendering unto caesar - or not

Remember this story from back in May?

Well, the Washington Post has another story as follow up:

Declaring that clergy have a constitutional right to endorse political candidates from their pulpits, the socially conservative Alliance Defense Fund is recruiting several dozen pastors to do just that on Sept. 28, in defiance of Internal Revenue Service rules.

More about that later.

But first, this: I happened upon this via The Revealer, a handy compendium of news about religion and media coverage of religion. They don't see what the big deal is:

So news of a bid to stop a bid to overturn the ban requires the journalistic equivalent of explaining why a joke is funny. It's hard to get outraged over defiance of a law you didn't know existed. Maybe I'm wrong.

Yeah, dude. You're wrong. This is a very big deal. Where the hell have you been? Anyone who goes to church (or works for a church board or school or any non profit organization) knows exactly what this law is and what the ramifications are if 501c3 organizations are allowed to participate in electioneering.

Back to my original outrage:
For churches to bleat that their rights are being infringed upon by an oppressive government because they can't say 'Sarah Palin is teh bomb!' from the pulpit during an election year - I call shenanigans on that. Anyone who works for a non profit (like I do) knows there are ways around this code and ways to bend the code. Under the tax code, non profits are allowed a lot of leeway. We can talk about policies; we can offer opinions on legislation; we can even participate in direct lobbying and the limits are even broader if we participate in grassroots lobbying. During an election year, we just can't stand on our pulpits (bully or otherwise) and say 'Sarah Palin is teh shit!' because it's sort of like exercising undue influence on folks when voting is supposed to be a private civil matter.

Beyond the the self-serving, disingenuous goal-post-moving (which seems to be a contemporary hallmark of the radical Christian Right), I think it's interesting how the orthodox self-image of the Church has changed.

(Putting on Sunday School hat)

If the Church was meant to be called out from the world (to be separate from it, if you will), and if we accept the idea that national electoral politics are, well, secular , then why are certain church people agitating for an increased ability to be more...worldly?

Do you understand what I'm saying?

Because progressive churches don't seem to have a problem with the current tax code as it's written. My denomination, for example, is perfectly ok with keeping the wall between Church and State in place. For some reason we don't think it's necessary for our pastor to tell folks how to vote or who to vote for - we just let our actions speak louder than our words.

We don't even associate our missions or activities to politics (though we will participate in the lobbying process when it comes to negotiating real estate in Chicago) because we see our missions as a direct outgrowth from our Christian mission - to help the less fortunate, to be graceful in our life toward one another - basically, to live the frakking beatitudes like they mean something.

Do more socially conservative congregations *not* live their mission? I won't say that. (And some congregations are very active in publicly maintaining their particular community standards when it comes to issues like homosexuality, reproductive freedom and the like.) But I'll say that it's interesting that simply living their mission and vision isn't enough for these churches and the ADF; jumping into the political muck and dictating national policy that impacts everyone, regardless of individual religious affiliation, seems too attractive an opportunity to pass up.

do *you* have friends of another color?

I'm glad Glamour had this panel (h/t Racialicious.)

Not to sound congratulatory, I've always had friends, close friends, of other ethnic backgrounds and I sincerely believe that most of this stuff about race and difference, white privilege and supremacy, would be addressed in a more thoughtful way if folks actually knew people of another ethnicity.

(Like, KNEW them. Not knew OF them. You know?)

Slightly related, but sort of different, over at Stuff White People Do, Macon D. had a really thought provoking post about all-white spaces and the cultural, historical, social blindnesses that kind of monochromaticity can create.

(Hm. 'Monochromaticity.' Perhaps not a real word. But, like, Lollapalooza. Did anyone else notice how White Lolla was and how nearly all the social pairings/groupings seen were monochromatic?)

In a similar way, I think having friends all of one color is...limiting. It speaks to an insularity that I think is really puzzling.

Anyway, Glamour wants to know and I do, too: Do you have intimate friends (not mere acquaintances) from another ethnic group? If so, what's your story?

(I'll show you mine if you show me yours.)

RNC 08! Didn't I say?? Didn't I?

It's about McCain!!
Dude. I totally need to have my own national column.

At last, the Judgment and Leadership questions are being asked!!

Who Will Be the Boss? | The American Prospect

RNC 08!: it's about McCain

Disclosures on Palin Raise Questions on Vetting Process - NYTimes.com (h/t Americablog)

There are so many things wrong with this, where to begin?

Well, let's begin with how this story is a perfect example of how Republicans say one thing and reality dictates something else, entirely.

They say: McCain's campaign thoroughly checked Palin out
Reality: "A Republican with ties to the campaign said the team assigned to vet Ms. Palin in Alaska had not arrived there until Thursday, a day before Mr. McCain stunned the political world with his vice-presidential choice. The campaign was still calling Republican operatives as late as Sunday night asking them to go to Alaska to deal with the unexpected candidacy of Ms. Palin."

They say: McCain's campaign knew Palin inside and out
Reality: "top aides were vague on Monday about how and when he had learned of [Bristol Palin's] pregnancy, and from whom."

They say: McCain's campaign went through the vetting process painstakingly
Reality: "[McCain] had his first face-to-face interview with her on Thursday and offered her the job moments later. Advisers to Mr. Pawlenty and another of the finalists on Mr. McCain’s list described an intensive vetting process for those candidates that lasted one to two months."

They say: McCain's campaign had the FBI check her out
Reality: "an F.B.I. official said Monday the bureau did not vet potential candidates and had not known of her selection until it was made public."

They say: McCain's campaign did a good job gathering all background information
Reality: "officials in Alaska said Monday they thought it was peculiar that no one in the state had the slightest hint that Ms. Palin might be under consideration" - including the state's GOP chair, state legislative leaders, business leaders, community leaders - leaders of any kind.

They say: McCain's campaign wanted the selection to be a surprise.
Reality: They didn't do their homework.

But the biggest gap in what McCain's camp says and what the reality is becomes clearer once we discover who the main driver was behind the Palin pick.

They say: McCain is a maverick, a reformer beholden to no one.
Reality: "As word leaked out that Mr. McCain was seriously considering [Joe Lieberman and Tom Ridge], the campaign was bombarded by outrage from influential conservatives who predicted an explosive floor fight at the convention and vowed rejection of Mr. Ridge or Mr. Lieberman by the delegates."

And who were these influential conservatives? The Christian Right.

Wow, McCain. Way to stand tall.

RNC 08!: leaving no civil right unviolated

La Chola has updates on her space on the arrests at the RNC convention.

Oh, haven't heard about the arrests? Haven't heard about journalists, independent media and people being arrested, harassed, detained and whole neighborhoods being raided?

Don't worry. That's exactly how the Republicans like it. Burn that platform they distributed. They crap on the idea of democracy in the name of national security.

Nihilix has posts up at Bitch, PhD about the St. Paul arrests here and here.

Bitch also has good links for coverage here.

Also check out The Campaign Silo and Fire Dog Lake for updates.

Number of arrests: 187 and counting.

Thank you, Republicans. Thanks for the peek into your worldview: you, all safe and pink inside your bunker of freedom while rubber bullets and tear gas flies outside.

[However, if you want to giggle a little, just go here and click on the video of reporter Campbell Brown finally holding a McCain spokesman's feet to the fire about Palin.]

shame? what shame?!

My friends say I don't have enough empathy; they say that because I live a certain way (a way that makes logical sense to me) that I am confounded and impatient when others apparently don't.

They have a point.

I was reading this piece about a young woman's quest to buy Plan B contraception and I found myself becoming frustrated. In her piece, she's given the runaround by clueless pharmacists, nurses and doctors - people who should know better, who should know what Plan B is, that it's available over the counter and does NOT require a prescription unless you're under 18. And in the comments, other women tell of the same runaround as well as the shame they felt in having to explain that they had sex, their regular contraception failed and they needed Plan B immediately.

My frustration has two objects:

Object 1: the medical profession who clearly didn't get the effing memo that Plan B went OTC one year ago. How the frak do you call yourself a professional when you don't know this? And how do you feel about giving women the wrong information, delaying their ability to use Plan B effectively? Really. I want to know. If there are nurses or pharmacists out there who have told women they need a prescription for Plan B, please tell me why you don't know how to do your job.

(Yes, I'm angry. Professional sloppiness makes me angry. It's a pet peeve of mine and it's not reserved for folks who don't know that Plan B is available to women over the age of 18 over the frakking counter!!)

Object 2: women who had no clue about Plan B (that it existed, where to get it and thought the whole thing was befuddling - where have you been for the past year? Why haven't you been paying attention to issues that affect your body's liberty??) and those who felt shame even if they did nothing to deserve the shaming. You are a GROWN WOMAN. You have a basic frakking human right to have sex, have accidents happen and you have no business feeling ashamed for needing, asking for, Plan B.

(Why do I call it a right? Because it's the frakking basic human condition - we humans have sex, have accidents and shit happens.)

Don't get me wrong. I know the feeling. When I first got my period and I had to go into a grocery store and ask for tampons and sanitary napkins, the grocery dude smirked and I wanted to die.

But I was 11 years old.

I'm 39 now. Someone tries to make me ashamed of my sexuality, or my body's requirements, and I will verbally punch them in the scrotal sac. We are Western women living in the most privileged country on earth. And we still feel shame for asking about birth control?? We feel shame in the face of someone's unprofessional ignorance?? Lord on a stick!

Sometimes I think our foremothers look at us and roll their eyes in disgust.

I know there are real issues about access and pharmacist's refusals to dispense. I know that. But this isn't about that - I'm talking about middle class women who should know better! My frustration is about a certain kind of woman who feels shame first, rather than anger that she's getting pushed around by an ignorant nurse!

I know. Pillory me. My attitude is intolerant, arrogant and maybe bordering on sexist.

But FRAK if I don't feel that women should get angry first and feel shame later. When it comes to sex or our bodies why is our default emotion shame? What patriarchal bullshit is that? Aargh!

(taking calming breath)

Now. Where to get emergency contraception/Plan B (Plan B is the brand sold in the US) if you aren't blessed with a Walgreens or CVS in your neighborhood, or if you suspect your local pharmacist might be a Bible banger who thinks contraception kills babies:

You can start here. It has a helpful zip code finder for emergency contraception providers as well as tip sheets for how to explain what you need, how to answer the questions they may ask and what usual costs are. (I paid $50 at CVS.)

Rant over. Carry on!

omg: fire in the neighborhood!

It pays to be the crazy lady who stays up waay past her bedtime to read.

Around 2 am, I was getting ready for bed and saw orange flames coming from the alley across the way. I thought I was maybe seeing flames from a deck party so I ran to the windows in the living room.

Shit! The trash behind one of the buildings was burning and the fire was slowly climbing higher. The houses are so close here, it would be no problem for it to spread.

I grabbed my phone, gabbled my information to 911 and pulled on jeans and a shirt over my nightie. I ran down the hall, the stairs, my flip flops really loud on the concrete. The sirens could be heard just about a street away. When the first engine arrived, I stood in the middle of the street pointing in the direction of the fire down the alley.

Standing in the alley behind my building I watched as the flames grew brighter, taller and reached the electrical and phone lines. Then I began counting how far in the fire was - about 5 houses, in the middle of the block.

My friend, G-, lived in the middle of the block! Running down the street, around the corner, to the front of the building on fire. I pounded on G-'s door, yelling her name. I called her cell phone - it said it was out of service. The condos behind and beside the building on fire began to evacuate. People carried their kids and their pets.

I called T-, another neighborhood friend, to see if she could track G- down then remembered that she mentioned going to DC to visit her brother. Her cat - ? No clue. T- left her a message to check in, if she was ok in DC. The fire was soon out in about 10 minutes.

The three engines are leaving now. The street next to the loft is a lake, practically.

SO glad I didn't fall asleep on the couch watching Law & Order reruns.