yay! we have internet!

(but no one knows for how long.) qm network is being very buggy. it's been non-existant most of the morning.

( x-quiz, from brenna )

also, what ails pedestrians? it does not matter what color the bike path is, which side of the pavement it's on, whether or not the pedestrian path is nicer and shadier...no matter what, pedestrians will always walk on the bike path, and will then give bikers dirty looks. have i suffered a head injury? i thought that big fucking BIKE stencilled on the pavement meant it was a BIKE path. as in, for BIKES, not pedestrians. morons. it should be allowable to run them over. i have no problems with being polite and patient on a path that's for both pedestrians and bikers, but it's annoying as all hell to have to put up with stupid pedestrians on bike paths.

what was the court thinking?

it is extremely rare that i find myself on the side of a minority that includes scalia, thomas, and rehnquist, but kelo v new london-what the holy fuck? that is a serious abuse of eminent domain. if these homeowners didn't want to sell to a private developer, that was completely within their rights. i'm in agreement with o'connor.