I'll have what Hec's having, minus the salt.

---

I know, Cindy. I was just remembering back to my young-mother years, when I would happily have plonked the kids in front of "Stories Too Tacky Even For Hustler" if it would have bought me a half-hour's peace.

Betsy, when Ben was somewhere around Owen's age, we watched the Camelot film at my mother's house. He was tooling around in his walker (walkers weren't quite outlawed, yet). He heard Franco Nero sing the "If Ever I Would Leave You" song, he was spellbound. I took the tape home with me, and played it a couple of times during the week, because he it was so damned cute. The next week or so, Scott had to travel for business. I was trying to pack up the car, to go stay with my folks for a night. He was in the stage Annabel is in, where he hated me to leave the room. I would rewind the song, run out to car with a bag, run back in, rewind the song, run out with the portacrib, run back in, lather, rinse, repeat.

Ha! We have Noggin, now, Betsy. 12 hours, 7 days a week of pre-school age programming with NO commercials. None. The only price we pay is having the damnedest earworms you'd ever hear. Ever.

At least Laurie Berkner's songs are catchy but not cloying. We didn't have Noggin for the older two kids.

We gave them the A Charlie Brown Christmas DVD last night, and watched it together. They adore it, which makes me glad. A year or two ago, we couldn't interest them in it when it came on TV, and we sat there feeling old and awful, wondering if their taste was all in their mouths.

---

streaks through the new natter thread wearing a holly crown and strategically placed tinsel.

---

First 25?

---

We gave them the A Charlie Brown Christmas DVD last night, and watched it together. They adore it, which makes me glad.

I was listening to music from that today. It gives me a happy.

---

Top 30.

---

These are the sorts of emails I receive at work:

FYI -- there's a new PRL which has a remarkably simple value for the fundamental quantum limit for time measurement. It's just

(here's a random equasion that looks like sandscrit)

where t is the time to be measured and t_p is the Planck time. Taking t_p to be 10^-43 s predicts a fundamental variation of 2x10^-29 s for a 1 s measurement. We're half way there!

And thank goodness! Because I was just worrying about the fundamental quantum limit for time measurement!

I want to work somewhere where I'm the smartest person in the building.

---

I want to work somewhere where I'm the smartest person in the building.

Rumsfeld may have to go...

---

I want to work somewhere where I'm the smartest person in the building.

Me, too, but I don't really feel like forming a one-person corporation.

---

sluttttt.

edit: whee!!! Thread number.

And now that that is out of my system, nice new thread. Mmmm, shiny.

---