Yeah, I don't think Trump is trying to get out. I think he responds in the meanest way possible to every perceived insult or slight without regard for consequences because he's never been affected in any meaningful way to any consequence of his actions.

Trump wants to be president, he wants to stand at podiums while thousands cheer, he wants to go to foreign countries and have people bow to him. Isn't that what the job of president is all about?

Ok, so I finally got the call for a Skype screening interview for the job! Two weeks from today.

Yay! But dag, that is one slow-moving process.

Keep in mind I'm still wearing an ankle brace because I tripped over my own feet coming down the stairs.

My former boss broke her wrist slipping on a wet floor at work. Who designs workplaces where the floors become like skating rinks when wet, in a world where it rains?

See, now I'm relieved I'm not actually injured.

And at least I'm going to see Rev. Barber speak tonight. With Rev. James Forbes! It should be something.

Good luck, flea!!

Wipe out bad, but seeing Rev. Barber should be electrifying

I had to drive to Glendale yesterday to go to a birthday party, and while it was fun, today my hip and back ache. Ugh. So over this injury! But at least I'm going to see the chiro/PT again today so that should help.

And yes, good luck on the interview, flea!

I keep having this image that, in November (thanks to a merciful deity), Trump loses but refuses to accept it. He gives a victory speech instead of a concession, acts as though he's going to be sworn in (rather than sworn at) in January, goes to the White House demanding access so his decorator can measure for drapes, etc. And is incensed when the Secret Service pulls his detail.

I have a much darker picture in my head of what Trump and his followers will do if, come January, someone other than Trump is sworn in.

Relatedly, someone - I forget who - said something about Clinton's suits being boxy to hide the flack jacket underneath, and now I can't see her sartorial choices any other way.

For those of us suffering from excessive anxiety about a possible Trump presidency, I think we need a support group.

Maybe call it, "But I don't wanna live under a fascist autocracy."

Oh man, I got another author who is shocked -- SHOCKED! -- that their article was...

[wait for it]

...EDITED. (Seriously, the author said in her angry little email that "Almost every sentence was edited!" And I though, "Oh shit, did I miss some?")

It's less than 3 Word doc pages, and the author has contacted the head of her department at her university to see how to proceed, because "I have been published numerous times and never has this happened to me before." (Yeah, your weird syntax should be a tipoff as to why I had to edit almost every sentence.)

ISTG, 90% of the times that an author complains that their precious baby words have been defiled by nasty-wasty editing, it's for an editorial. The authors who write 30-page research studies, more often than not, reply with "This reads so much better! Thanks for the editing!"

So, I have to reply to this precious princess and tell her all articles are edited to comply with the style as laid out in the 10th edition of the AMA Style Manual (available for purchase at purveyors of texts everywhere) [no, I'm not including the parenthetical] AND including a link to the Instructions for Authors, which say the same damn thing (namely, YOU WILL BE EDITED, YOU DINK).

And I would bet large sums of money she will reply angrily that, no! HER precious baby words are an exception! At which point I will have to kick her up the chain, because she is a jerk and is wasting our time by not understanding what "editing" means.