>Barring funerals, pretty much the only time I hear from my now far-flung McNally relatives is when the Red Sox are doing well at whatever it is they do.
>Barring funerals, pretty much the only time I hear from my now far-flung McNally relatives is when the Red Sox are doing well at whatever it is they do. Which, I guess, they've done. Honestly, I feel like I should trade houses with my California (or Delaware, Maryland . . .) cousins, because while I live a scant three miles from Fenway Park, the only reason I even check the game schedule is to find out if we're going to have trouble parking for the movies. I went to a game once, forty-five years ago with my Cub Scout troop (oops, I automatically spelled that
troupe, how gay is that?) and all I remember is that we got popcorn in little cardboard megaphones. But I'm glad my family is happy.
I've got a three-way going on with Jules and Eisha, the gals of Seven Impossible Things Before Breakfast, reviewing Perry Moore's
Hero;
check it out.
Going to New York for a few days to see Elizabeth and attend a memorial celebration for
Lloyd Alexander; tonight I'll be dining with the Child_Lit crowd, bloggers
Betsy,
Cheryl and
Monica among them. That should be particularly lively as the list is currently divided among* those who think J. K. Rowling is a hero for her recent revelation re Dumbledore, those who think she is a publicity-seeking fame whore, and those like myself who haven't read Book Seven and are just staying out of the whole thing.
* Joanna Rudge Long recently called me on following
between with three things. Is it really wrong?
Add Comment :-
Comment Policy:
Comment should not be empty !!!
anne
>On the subject of between and among, among should be used for more than two items UNLESS the items much all be considered individually. So the three grey women had one eye between them, because they were indistinct from one another, but you choose between chocolate, vanilla, and strawberry because they are distinct choices. Also, among and amongst mean the same thing.Posted : Oct 25, 2007 12:29
Amy
>Go Red Sox!That's a great Bill Buckner joke but it belongs to the pre 2004 Sox era. Ill have to go find the Gutman
book on the shelf.
Posted : Oct 24, 2007 08:22
Stella
>*cries a little*Go Indians! Forever!
Posted : Oct 23, 2007 02:38
Anonymous
>maybe because Rowling needs publicity like a fish needs a bicycle?--R.
Posted : Oct 22, 2007 09:29
Anonymous
>of course it should be "among" but more inportant, why hasn't it occurred to any of you how much free publicity Rowling is getting by her "spontaneous" revelation to a possibly planted question?Posted : Oct 22, 2007 08:02