So here it is, Saturday night... I'm just back from having a couple drinks after work. It is currently minus 4 degrees and this is supposed to be the coldest night yet, with temps dipping down to minus 30 and lower tonight.

I know, you-all are sick of my weather reports but hey, it's my blog and I'll whine if I want to... By Wednesday we are supposed to be back to normal and have high temps in the 28-32 range.

The real point of this post is that tonight, one of the two TV stations I get, VT PBS, is showing one of my favorite movies, "Arsenic And Old Lace." What a perfect way to spend a freezing evening, huddled by the heater, enjoying a movie made when movies depended on plot and characters instead of today's movies which try to rely on special-effects. My wonderful cats will plop themselves down on and around me. Have a great weekend everybody. I'll be back here sometime on Sunday.

One more thing... I have actually settled down to a steady schedule of blogging on Sunday, Monday, Wednesday (Gun Bias Chart!) and Friday's. This leaves me space to recharge my batteries and surf around the web and spend time with friends and family and not take myself or my blog so seriously. Alphecca will never get a lot of visitors, but those of you who do surf by now and then are precious to me. I will try very hard to think and write intelligently and earn your loyalty. I wish all of you warmth and coziness and good things in your life. And you should all have a big-fat-cat sleeping on your belly. Thanks for stopping by!

The great Rachel Lucas is redesigning the look of her blog and she's looking for suggestions for a new tagline. So give her a hand because some of the suggestions so far are a little lame for someone like her. I made a few myself including, "Rachel Lucas, .50 Caliber Commentary."

Update: She's made her choice. Deal is done.

---

By the way, this morning it only dropped down to minus 17 degrees...

...warmed up to a balmy minus 13 degrees outside. Maybe I'll wear shorts and sandals to work today.

Anyway, that looks to be a wrap for the week. As always, I take Saturdays off to chill-out so I'll see you all back here Sunday night. Have a great weekend everyone and thanks for stopping by.

Some of our servicemen, their families, and six lame members of Congress have filed suit to prevent Bush from using force to disarm Iraq. From AP writer Denise Lavoie:

BOSTON - Six House members, members of the military and parents of servicemen went to federal court Thursday to try to prevent the president from launching an invasion of Iraq without an explicit declaration of war from Congress.

And Muslim Terrorist kisser Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) is leading the charge:

Conyers cited the passage from the U.S. Constitution that states, "Congress shall have power ... to declare war."

"Get it? Only Congress," Conyers said at a news conference in Washington.

John Bonifaz, the Boston lawyer who filed the lawsuit seeking an immediate injunction, said Bush is rushing to war without seeking approval or even a thorough debate by Congress.

As usual, they're both wrong. Last October both the House and Senate did in fact authorize (by overwhelming majorities) the use of force in Iraq. What exactly do Conyers and Bonifaz think "force" means? The article does point out that there have always been lawsuits filed against presidents in times of war and none of them have passed muster in the courts. But what really disturbs me about this suit is that several un-named active servicemen have joined the suit:

Bonifaz said the new lawsuit is different because in addition to the six members of Congress, members of the military have asked for the injunction. "They are facing the possibility of death," he said.

Here's a clue for the clueless Bonifaz: When you agree to enlist in the totally volunteer military service, guess what? You face the possibility of seeing real action and yes, facing death. Why did they enlist? Just to grab all the benefits such as free college money, paid training, etc.? But now that they might actually have to earn these perks, suddenly they turn "chicken" and want out? They want to prevent the United States from disarming one of their sworn enemies?

The participants in this injunction who are active military personnel should be exposed, drummed-out of the military, and subject to total scorn and shame. Better yet, they should be exiled to France where they belong.

...it is currently minus 22 degrees outside. Not to worry; it's supposed to zoom up to 3 by Noon. This is how it's been and how it will be until next week. We've only hit 30 twice since Christmas. My car hates me. I don't have a garage and every morning when I go to start it, what sounds like a slow grinding noise is really my car saying, "damn you, damn you, damn you!"

Social engineers (that would be Democrats) in Maine have introduced legislation to combat obesity. From today's Washington Times, here's Joyce Howard Price:

ÝDemocratic state legislators in Maine this week are introducing the nation's "first comprehensive legislative package to combat obesity."

The bill would require nutrition labeling on menus in large chain restaurants, ban soft drinks and junk food in schools, promote transportation policies that encourage walking and create a commission to study the causes of obesity.

Do they really need a commission to figure out the reason people are overweight? Hey, Maine folks! The cause of obesity is eating too much.

There! I've just saved them a pile of dough -- oops, that's fattening too.

Now just so you understand where I'm coming from... I am not an especially religious person. Do I believe in God? ...Probably. But I don't follow any particular "organized" religion these days. I think most of them are hypocritical and in many cases downright silly. But I have no problem with people who are devout and wish to express that -- as long as they aren't hypocritical about it.

All of this is just a preamble to an op-ed by E. J. Dionne Jr. in today's Washington Post. He questions why some folks get so upset when President Bush quotes from the Bible or invokes God's name in speeches. Here's a teaser quote:

There he goes again. Here's our president, the president of our land of religious liberty, going out there and making his point by citing Saint Paul's letter to the Ephesians.

"Ephesians says we should speak the truth with our neighbors for we are members one of another," the president said. "I believe that. I think that is the single most important political insight, or social insight, in the Bible. And I think it is what should drive us as we behave together."

Then he got to the compassionate God-talk. "Is my destiny caught up in yours?" he asked. "Are we part of the same family of God? It's not enough to say we are all equal in the eyes of God. We are all also connected in the eyes of God."

And the crowd applauded.

Does it bother you that our president talks that way? If it does, consider this: The speech I just quoted was not given by President Bush. It was given at Washington's Metropolitan Baptist Church in December 1997 by a president named William Jefferson Clinton.

Lord knows, I don't have a problem with criticizing George W. Bush. But can we please stop pretending that Bush's regular invocations of the Almighty make him some sort of strange religious fanatic? In how he speaks of God, Bush is much more typically presidential than he is painted, especially by our friends abroad.

Dionne goes on to say that he is bothered when Bush invokes God to justify going to war with Iraq and I have a problem with that as well. After all, this is the same justification Muslim extremists use to justify their attacks on the various civilized nations (including the U.S.) as well. But in ordinary speeches I don't mind hearing about God.

In fact, I rather like it. When Clinton did it, well, I just didn't believe him. But then, by the end of his presidency I didn't believe anything Clinton said. But I do believe that President Bush is, or has become devout. I like a serious leader of our country showing some humility and demonstrating (at least by words, anyway) that there is still someone more powerful and knowing then him. Hopefully he will be guided by the more charitable passages from the Bible.

In a similar vein (*slurp*) I have said before that I don't consider myself a Republican, and certainly not a Democrat (these days) but I do appreciate that so many Democrats come off as shrill, pathetic social engineers who allow every little special-interest group to pull their strings. They act and sound like little children. The Republicans are not necessarily much better but at least most of them act like adults. As I get older (and older...) I have less tolerance for the silliness of the left and more respect for mature, well-thought-out rhetoric -- even if I disagree with it!

I admit I don't always meet that test myself. But as I grow into this roll of blogger I am trying to do better. I am also less concerned these days with how many "hits" I get and would prefer a stable, loyal readership. To those ends, I will keep trying to improve my writings here.

The Bitch Girls have added a new... er, bitch. Her name's Lefty Bitch. Bitter wrote me:

She's a Democrat dating a gun nut up in Vermont. Slowly we will end up pulling her over. :) She actually is more supportive of gun rights than she used to be. Slowly we will win over the college girl population! Perhaps that's a bit ambitious right now. :)

So you all should head over there to welcome her.

Incidentally, The Bitch Girls have said they plan to visit here sometime (they're in Western MA.) and Mama Bear over at On The Third Hand says she comes up to Vermont each Summer to visit relatives and Arthur Silber has told me he will be visiting Boston this Summer as well and might head up here...

Sounds like the makings of a small blogger bash this Summer if we could all get a common date set... I would like to suggest July 4th. Fairlee has a big parade (which starts in Orford, N.H., across the bridge) of kids, farm and logger vehicles, kids on stilts, school floats, and fire trucks from ten towns. Then a big chicken bar-b-que on the town green, and then everyone heads over to the lake to watch the (grantedly modest) fireworks. New England at it's best and most patriotic. And Fairlee (VT., where I live) has a championship golf course, and being a tourist trap town, has plenty of restaurants, inns, antique shops, a drive-in theater, and other cool sights. And there's nowhere more beautiful then a small Vermont town during the Summer...

So I'm cruising around the web, visiting Alphecca's good friends:

First of all, my buddy and HTML mentor Aubrey Turner has this great post which carries on about the comment I quoted from a reader as (stating that I am) being a "bad queer" on the side-bar comments column. Why can't everyone have Aubrey's sensibilities?

---

Meanwhile, Tim Wilson manages to use the word, "anisotropy," which I've never even heard of. I like his blog a lot and I hope you start visiting him.

---

Hey, Diane at Everything Must Go is holding a contest and it ends tonight so go there quickly! Diane is (as is Aubrey) one of the first people to blogroll me. I hope you will visit her as well because I really enjoy her blog.

---

Now this demands your immediate attention: Susskins Report is reporting that Crayola is thinking of discontinuing Burnt Sienna. My Ghod! Is nothing sacred? Head over there for the colorful details (I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I'm sorry -- I had to say it!)

---

Lastly, and -- since it's about me -- leastly, I'm "off" today and with all the telemarketers calling in, I've just left a new message on my answering maching:

Hi, you've reached the headquarters of the Alphecca Gun Club. We're out right now targeting telemarketers...

Anyway, I'll see you all back here soon. Thanks for stopping by!

Each week I read through all the article links, editorials, et cetera posted on the front page of the Yahoo Gun Control Debate Page. I rate the "bias" of the stories and put it into a table. Needless to say, the majority of the articles and op-eds Yahoo chooses to link to are anti-gun and are for more gun control. Let's start with the table:

Yahoo Gun Control Debate Page Articles
Sample Date	For More Gun Control Or Is Anti-Gun	Not More Gun Control Or Is Pro 2nd Amendment	Neutral Articles	Concurrent Events Notes
02/12/03	12	2	6
02/5/03	11	2	7	Ashcroft/ATF prosecutions
01/29/03	10	4	6
01/22/03	18	1	1	Sniper victim lawsuits against gunshop & Bushmaster and AZ arms cache
01/14/03	14	1	4
01/08/03	16	3	2	England gang murders & ban on air/replica guns
01/01/03	15	4	1
Dec. Avg.	14	4	3	Canadian Registry fiasco & NJ "smart-gun" law
Nov. Avg.	17	3	2	D.C. snipers

There were quite a few new editorials listed but no common theme other then the dreary call for more gun control. I've already mentioned (scroll down to Sunday) the story from the Baltimore Sun about still more gun control measures being considered in Maryland.

There was a link to this AP story about the Manhattan Libertarian Party giving away toy guns and water-pistols to school children. Personally, I think banning things like water-pistols is truely inane. But I also think passing toy guns out to children is a stupid way to make a point. This is why I continue to call my self a "small l" libertarian. As I've said from day one (read the "about me") that the Libertarian party always fields bad candidates and sometimes nutty policies. A stunt like this is not going encourage anyone to switch parties.

Then there's Michael Moore's new understudy! John Grogan, in the Philadelphia Inquirer, writes this drivel:

And so on Friday I went to Wal-Mart to experience firsthand the safeguards that failed to save Richard Lee ((who committed suicide after buying a shotgun from a Walmart--Jeff)) from himself. I sighted briefly down the barrel, then said, "OK, I'll take it." I had been at the counter for four minutes.

I was waiting for Bob to grill me about my inexperience and motives for wanting a cheap gun. Had I completed a gun-safety course? Did I have any practice handling firearms?

Instead he asked me for two pieces of identification and gave me a federal form that asked a series of yes/no questions intended to root out the unstable and criminally inclined.

Had I ever been convicted of a felony? Ever been the subject of a restraining order? Any history of domestic abuse? Mental illness? Drunken driving? Drug addiction?

If I had evil intent, did they really expect me to answer truthfully?

I handed Bob $2 for the background check and he phoned in my information to the state police's Pennsylvania Instant Check database.

Ten minutes later, he returned with a box and packed my shotgun into it.

The clerk at Walmart did nothing wrong. He's not required to be a psychiatrist or mind-reader. He showed you how to operate the gun. He refused to sell you (store policy) the ammo to go with the gun. He ran the required background check on you. He asked for i.d. As for what I call "the yellow form," you fill it out and sign it just as you would any legal document you affix your signature to attesting that you are telling the truth. It provides the store with a record of your purchase, your representation, and the approval of the ATF and state authorities.

Since you are an adult, you have the right (at least in Pennsylvania) to buy a gun without jumping through hoops. If you're suicidal, well, that's your business. If you've a criminal past, that's what the phone call finds out. Does Grogan really think Walmart clerks should administer lie-detector tests?

He blathers on:

On the way home, I wasn't feeling particularly homicidal or suicidal or deranged. But had I been - and had I not aborted my shotgun sale at the last moment - I would have been, in Bob's words, "set to go."

And he concludes:

I later checked with the state police in Harrisburg, who confirmed that Bob had properly done everything the law asks of him. Pennsylvania requires no gun-safety training. No proof of competence. No cooling-off period. Not even an overnight delay. Just 27 minutes and two forms of ID.

That wasn't enough to stop Richard Lee. And it won't be enough to stop the next Richard Lee, either.

Hey Grogan, here's a clue: If someone wants to commit suicide, they'll find a way with or without a gun.

---

So here's something much more interesting: Reader Dave Himrich (visit his blog here) has prepared a neat little Excel chart tracking pro-gun or 2nd Amendment stories from my weekly table. Hard to read so just click-it to view it full size:



I've included Dave's excellent comments about the chart in that pop-up window. My thanks go out to Dave for this. Do I have cool visitors or what?

I received this thoughtful comment from Ivan P.:

What if the US was not intending to invade Iraq? What if instead this was an invasion of Saudi Arabia? First and foremost, this attack would be much more of a cakewalk than any attack on Iraq. Second, while the Iraqi ties to terrorism are vague and not accepted by many; the Saudis are known sponsors of terror and where none of Iraq's citizens participated directly in the 9-11 attacks quite a few Saudis did. With a 100,000 plus army and carrier forces stationed in countries neighboring Saudi Arabia and in Saudi Arabia an immediate attack would take the Saudis completely by surprise before they could use any oil threats to scare us away.

Even though Saudi Arabia is large, only a small portion of the country need be occupied because most is desert. A quick strike on Riyadh and occupation of Saudi oil fields would mean little to no halt of oil. This force could occupy Riyadh easily and take the Saudi royal family and other known accomplices to terrorists into protective custody. A new pro-America and more liberal group could be found to run a provisional government in the interim period. Youíll notice that I did not mention Mecca or Medina. The western half of Saudi Arabia will be left untouched. The Hejaz region is less Arab than the interior and they might break off on their own anyway thouhg not much real support would come that region. Besides, with Riyadh and several other cities on the east coast the US would have almost 200 miles of desert protecting from counterattacks. The area occupied will be administered by a government dedicated towards supporting the West and liberalizing over time.

The result of this operation? US secures oil from the hands of our enemies. The US now has a base of support and a country which will help destroy Islamic fundamentalism. The chief supplier of radical Islamic schools, Saudi Arabia, would be impoverished and forced to reconcile itself to really improving its government and society. Without the threat of an oil embargo, the rest of the Middle East would be forced to reconcile themselves to Western ideas and stop the funding of terrorism.

True this is a best case scenario and the worst case scenario might be as bad as the best case is good, but to many Americans this might be seen as a viable alternative to war with Iraq. Plus any action would be over within less than a week and the world would be reacting to an entrenched power. The results could easily be like those of Israelís Six Day War.

Many bloggers have, in the past, made the case that Saudi Arabia is a true part of the "Axis-of-Evil" and bears much of the responsibility for funding Al Qaida and their attacks on America and American targets overseas. I agree. And I think it's hypocritical of the Bush administration to keep giving Saudi Arabia a pass everytime they are implicated in an incident.

The only reasons I can think of as to why Saudi Arabia is not targeted is the obvious one of the flow of oil. But as Ivan points out, we could stomp the House of Saud in a matter of days. Secondly though, SA was a "partner" in Desert Storm and also allowed the allies to stage strikes from airfields in SA. This made them "our friends." Thirdly, while almost all of the Arab countries' leaders loath Saddam, they don't dislike King Fahd and Crown Prince Abdullah.

Yes, a lot of Saud money flows to terrorists, but a lot also flows to other Arab "nations." So there would be a huge outcry from the Arab world if we (the U.S.) were to invade or attack SA. I've compared these problems before to a complicated chess game. Perhaps we need Big Blue to solve this one...

Here's Brent Hallenbeck in the Burlington Free Press:

A review of posted prices at pumps in and around Burlington over the weekend found the cost for a gallon of regular gas ranging from $1.54 on Riverside Avenue to the $1.69 Wilkinson paid on Shelburne Street.

He and others filling their tanks in and near the city Sunday said the high cost of driving has done little to change their traveling habits. In a community where consumers can pay $1.75 for 16 ounces of another kind of fuel -- coffee -- shelling out $1.69 for a gallon of gas isn't a big shock.

I wouldn't mind seeing the price of gas go even higher. Look, politicians have no problem taxing-to-death cigarettes and booze and other things to engineer society to giving them up. Fine, let's finally enforce some conservation of natural resources and break our dependence on all these Middle-East despots by raising the price of gas to the point where it does bother people. And maybe cause them to think twice about buying a car the size of a house-boat.

Hey, you are entitled to buy any kind of vehicle you want. But the U.S. government has no responsibility to insure that you can afford to drive that vehicle. And I'm sick of having the U.S. cow-tow to crap countries like Saudi Arabia just so the oil keeps flowing.

And frankly, Brent (the author of the story) is correct that if people are willing to pay a ton for designer water and coffee then fine -- let them pay just as much for something that is much more of a necessity. It costs the U.S. a great deal in aid, defense, and diplomacy to feed our hungry vehicles. You can cut down on cigarettes, coffee, and yes -- gasoline use. The choices are yours to make. Cheap gas is not a right.

For some time now Vermont has been shipping it's prison-inmates to Virginia to save money. Now those Virginian prisons have cut back to two meals a day on Weekends and Holidays for the inmates. Alan J. Keays writes about it in the Times-Argus:

Virginia recently reduced the number of meals it serves its prisoners on weekends and holidays to two a day in a cost-cutting move.

Vermont pays to house roughly 540 inmates in Virginia prisons. Vermont correctional officials said they have received calls from angry family members of inmates serving time in Virginia, but point out there is little they can do.

"There's a number of them that don't like it," said Richard Turner, director of correctional services for the Vermont Department of Corrections. "One of the things in our contract is that they will get treated as Virginia treats their own inmates."

And Vermont inmates will get as many meals as Virginia prisoners do, he said.

It's all perfectly legal. I have argued before that I think prison should not be fun at all, no gym, no games, no cable-tv. Let them read books that educate, and let them work at something that helps pay the cost of their incarceration and possibly pay-back their victims. Two meals a day? Fine with me. Maybe when they are released from jail they'll think twice before doing something that sends them back there.

And I still like the idea of a "Devil's Island." It's very cost effective and by putting the worst of the worst there and forgetting about them we rid society of even the risk of escape.

Gee, I am heartless this morning...

Jesse Jackson is going after the Detroit Lions. Russel Henderson is all over it. Jackson really has become a pathetic, irrelevant figure. As my boss would say, "pick your battles."

---

And Mike Silverman is not feeling the love from his liberal, anti-war friends. I run into the same problem with most lock-step liberal gays when it comes to my guns...

I just got an email, unsigned, from someone. They don't think my "Babs" postings are funny.

Well, what can I say? Humor is a very subjective thing.

As Helen Keller used to say:

"mnwaaauuuumnnooouuuaaalmnphaaaauuuulll..."


(Yes, I know, I'm going to hell. But you laughed too, so I'll see you down there...)

At work, I spend a lot of the day on the computer. At home, I spend a lot of the day on the computer. What do I do to relax? I thank my parents for giving me the "reading bug" when I was young. I love science-fiction and mysteries. But I like to actually hold and read the book or magazine, not read it on a computer monitor.

The only magazines I subscribe to are "pulps." An expensive habit but one I refuse to give up. I read Asimov's, Analog, F&SF, Ellery Queen's, and Alfred Hitchcock's. I also get DNA's Absolute Magnitude/Aboriginal and Fantastic. The comfort of snuggling up on the couch with the cats and losing myself in a good story is worth every penny.

But there's another reason I buy these magazines. Of course they publish great stuff by established big-name-pros but they are also the breeding ground, the culture dish if you will, for our future generations of writers. For the beginning writer, these magazines represent the only outlets left for them to "break into." Indeed, where else can you get an sf or mystery short story published these days? So I support them as best I can.

Anyway, I've got piles of back-issues to catch-up on so that's how I plan to spend the rest of the day. See you all back here tomorrow. Thanks for stopping by!

really has such a terrific blog, A Voyage To Arcturus. Anyway, this post is disturbing. A report that kindergarten children were actually tied-up with tape and one student was threatened with a hot-glue gun. Yipes! And this wasn't the first incident at this school. Jay has it covered.

They already have some of the most imposing gun control measures in the country -- not (*ahem*) that it's helped their crime rate any, and now they want to enact more! Here's Ivan Penn in the Baltimore Sun:

Gun control advocates pressed yesterday for new measures that would ban assault-style weapons, expand ballistic fingerprinting and require immediate reporting of lost or stolen handguns - and their efforts picked up tentative support from Gov. Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.

With Montgomery County police Chief Charles A. Moose and the mother of slain sniper victim Conrad Johnson appearing yesterday at a news conference in support of the bills, gun control immediately emerged as one of the prominent issues of the General Assembly session.

I've already ranted about ballistic fingerprinting (that post was from my very first archive and was linked to a lot!) and I don't intend to repeat myself now. It's a nice, sunny Sunday and I'm in a good mood.

I've also ranted about how more gun control wouldn't have helped catch the sniper any sooner. (That was a great post of mine too, so read that one as well.) I summed up that posting with:

Let's say that laws were passed by the hysterical left in this country, that anyone who wanted to possess a firearm had to have a Federal license, and register their gun. All together now,: since The Feds, and The Police didn't know who the snipers were (until the last days,) how would a Federal Gun License or Gun Registration have helped anyone catch these defective-brain mutants? Time's up. It wouldn't have helped at all. Until you have a name, a suspect, all the laws in the world can't help a damn.

I'm forced to agree with myself. (I know, you're shocked, shocked!) Look folks, the snipers got their guns in Washington. How will passing more gun control laws in Maryland prevent the exact same thing from happening again? Trying to pass laws to prevent mutant nut-cases from causing mayhem will accomplish nothing to prevent those nut-cases from... causing mayhem. All it will do is further restrict the legitimate, law-abiding gun owners from enjoying their own rights.

Freedom exacts a cost but loss of freedom is far more expensive. Just ask folks in North Korea, Iraq, Iran, etc...

I can't say I have a problem with having to report lost or stolen guns. You'd have to do it anyway to your insurance company just to cover your liable-ass.

I do notice that Gov. Ehrlich seems to be folding like a cheap camera. Oh well. Thank God I live in Vermont where the Second Amendment is (so far) inviolate.

Dave Himrich has created a cool Excel chart of my Wednesday gun-debate tallies and as soon as I figure out how to paste the thing into this blog I'll include it along with his excellent notes. Suggestions welcome. In the meantime, go visit his thoughtful new blog, Dave Himrich Thinks Out Loud. I am adding him to my blogroll.

---

Michele at A Small Victory has created the "Instant Comment Imaging System" for all the anti-war folks out there. An invaluable service for you lefties from a blog I always consider invaluable.

---

One of Alphecca's good friends, Leigh Hanlon at HanlonVision has several interesting posts up including one lamenting the loss of the days when we used telephone exchange letters such as (for you NY City folks) Murray Hill 7... I used to live in Teaneck, N.J. and our exchange was TE3. I miss those days as well since they made if far easier to remember everyone's number. He also discusses how your profile and screen names can be mis-interpreted. HanlonVision is a much different sort of blog then Alphecca (no guns, war, politics as such) but is always a lot of fun so check it out.

---

Also, Arthur Silber has been posting up a storm at The Light of Reason so stop by there as well.

---

If you scroll to "Alphecca gets noticed" on the sidebar, you'll notice that I've added links to all the "Babs" posts. I like to share the love...

---

And just a reminder, if you are a blogger who blogrolls me, let me know so I can return the favor. I try to visit all of my friends several times a week and post mentions when I have time. And if you have a posting you think I'd be interested in, drop me an email as well. So many great blogs out there and so little time. If I could just win the lottery and retire to blogging full-time (like Andrew) instead of trying to squeeze it in each morning before leaving for work...

And thanks to any visitors who feel like petting and feeding the kitties!