data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a9684/a96843a267dd55a071cc0360b7081de432e133c6" alt=""
If "only a man could have invented pantyhose," as my mom's been heard to grumble, then only a straight man could have come up with the compact fluorescent bulb. I'm coming along -- slowly -- but I wish they'd meet me halfway.
Random rants and ruminations
Dear Amy:
Is it okay to send pictures of our bridal portraits to high school and college friends to let them know we are getting married, even though we cannot invite them to the reception?
We have a wedding Web site and we've sent links to our family and friends, inviting everyone to the ceremony. The reception is invitation-only.
Is it appropriate to keep updating our friends who are not invited to the reception about our wedding-related planning?
I feel that they would be interested and would like to know what's going on with the wedding planning, but I don't know if they are expecting to be invited to the reception or not, or how it would feel for them not to be invited when the time comes.
Wedding Wondering
I know that this is almost impossible to believe, but nobody is interested in your wedding planning. When you're closer to the finish line, you're not even going to be interested in it. Please. Spare people. If you want to update your Web site, then fine. People can check in if they're interested. But regular updates e-mailed to friends and family? Lord, no.
Traditionally, engaged couples announce their happy news in the newspaper. Presumably, you are using a mass e-mail to this same purpose. Because you are spreading the word of your engagement far and wide, you're going to have to be very clear on a continuing basis that your reception is "invitation only" but you'd like to have friends witness your wedding if they're interested in doing so.
Separate weddings and receptions do occur in various churches and cultures, but it is unusual these days, so you're going to have to continually assert this. Some people will not understand what you're doing and will feel put out. Even if you feel you've been very clear about your wishes, expect confusion.
Brides, grooms, please read the first line of the response as many times as necessary until you feel your perspective return. Assuming you had any to begin with.
We know whom Alexandria is named after. We just don't know much about the guy. John Alexander was a Scottish planter who was living in Stafford County when he paid Robert Howson, an English ship captain, 6,000 pounds of tobacco for the land that would eventually take his family's name.
That was in 1669. Alexander died eight years later. From his will, we know he owned a horse named Black Beard and a "Colt that sucks of the Farling Mare" (whatever that means). He also slept in relative comfort. In his will he left a featherbed to Elizabeth Holmes, taking pains to note that "I do not mean the best bed but the Bed I brought out of England."
I don't know what tobacco costs these days, but a crappy little tract house in Alexandria can set you back half a million dollars or more.
Sounds like a reality show, doesn't it? As a matter of fact, it is: "The Dobsons of Duncraig" (which unfortunately doesn't seem to be available here). But why settle for TV when you can experience the real thing? Duncraig Castle is now accepting guests.
When I looked at the map, I realized I've been within a few miles of the place. So I can attest that the scenery is hauntingly beautiful. Just don't go in the winter, even if they've fixed the heat and hot water.
* The Scots take their castles very seriously, and many would assert with a dismissive sniff that, as a Victorian structure, Duncraig is not a castle -- merely a rich man's country house.
Michael Moore? Bill Maher? Keith Olbermann? No, Lee Iacocca.Am I the only guy in this country who's fed up with what's happening? Where the hell is our outrage? We should be screaming bloody murder. We've got a gang of clueless bozos steering our ship of state right over a cliff, we've got corporate gangsters stealing us blind, and we can't even clean up after a hurricane much less build a hybrid car. But instead of getting mad, everyone sits around and nods their heads when the politicians say, "Stay the course."
Stay the course? You've got to be kidding. This is America, not the damned Titanic. I'll give you a sound bite: Throw the bums out!
Public spitting is a frequent practice in Beijing and even more common elsewhere in China. (The sinus-clearing, phlegmy pre-spit hawking sound is so common that one foreigner wryly dubbed it “the national anthem of China.”)And of course those tricky translations:
Libs are generally more socially conscious and hence tend to actually give a modicum of thought to what it means to pop out a brood of children in this modern overstuffed age....
Conservative Christians, of course, have no such conscience. Among the right-wing God-lovin' set, there is often little real awareness of planetary health or resource abuse or the notion that birth control is actually a very, very good idea indeed, and therefore it's completely natural to worship at the altar of minivans and SUVs and megachurches and massive all-American entitlement and have little qualm about popping out six, seven, 19 gloopy tots to populate the world with frat boys and Ford F-150 buyers and food court managers.
... [T]he values of many -- maybe most -- Americans feel rooted in religion. As a society we need to have conversations about right and wrong. But in this increasingly pluralistic country we also need to uphold the idea that morals are not the exclusive property of any one religion. More controversially, we need to welcome the idea that values are not the exclusive property of religion itself.Yet another excellent column from Ellen Goodman.
Yet another conservative speaks out. Interesting story."For all the Rove-built facade of his being a 'strong' chief executive, George W. Bush has been, by comparison to even hapless Jimmy Carter, the weakest, most out of touch president in modern times," Gold writes. "Think Dan Quayle in cowboy boots."
Gold is even more withering in his observations of Cheney. "A vice president in control is bad enough. Worse yet is a vice president out of control."