well, just as soon as i say that vilsack-bayh would be the worst possible pairing, along comes word that John Kerry is running again. now, it’s obviously not official, but what internet rumor hasn’t come true?

besides, we don’t need a candidate to take serious action on the environment. global warming is a positive thing. we shouldn’t worry about heatwaves; new, fun research suggests that, “higher temperatures are killing people who are likely to die soon anyway.” It’s articles like this that make me wish I had a forbes subscription to cancel.

in other news, wildfires struck Malibu leaving Susanne Somers stranded. i’m sure she can always stay with cody. a quick look at Step-by-Step’s wikipedia page reveals some funny details about the show. for example, the producers almost brought on Dave Coulier to replace Cody’s comic relief. (btw, it’s always a bad sign when a sitcom requires comic relief).

on the word front, fake jew has an interesting post on typing “Jewish” into google. the same thing has happened to me a couple of times. i’m sure it has to do with google’s page algorithm (you know, the same one that gives this site a more prominent result for Brandy Taylor than her official site). i wonder what other terms lead people to such bizarre explanations. have the Visigoths also been the product of such ill-treatment?

in YS news: if you’re going to leave a comment, do it in style. just check out this one for a model of a great comment. just promise me you wont visit his website.

i’m also in the process of trying to get some of the supposed contributors to YS to contribute. one assures me he’ll start soon, one’s phone always goes straight to voicemail, and cody’s probably too bust at codyhess.com. hopefully you’ll see even more of a melange here at the salad.

none of these words are truly deserving of a full post, but perhaps like a Vilsack-Bayh ticket, the sum will be worthwhile. (by the by, I just picked the worst two democratic names out of a hat, and I’d still feel happier with them in office than with any combination of republicans.)

herein he begins to blog…

in commiseration with jewbiquitious: long, v1. anyone reading jewbiquitous recently knows they’ve been rehashing some tough times. hopefully cj will be there to help (as a short time reader, i have no clue who cj is; talk about a steep learning curve).

“long”‘s original definition was exactly what you’d expect from its form: To grow longer; to lengthen. Obs.

Old English actually used the word in the current sense way back in the 9th century, but the word is considered impersonal, and takes the accusative (i think it now takes the dative. I long for ___ rather than “I long ___). for those interested, the correct form was “me longs” as in “me longs jennifer,” or “longeth” in more formal speech. from this we eventually get the current meaning.

there was also, “to long away,” (obs) meaning to put far away, to depart. longing away would cause longing.

in informant gave me the wrong definition department: fata morgana. i was told that fata morgana meant to see a mirage. unfortunately, it’s just a specific type of mirage. i don’t really believe that there is a specific verb for seeing a mirage. “to mirage” is to produce as a mirage or to cause something to resemble a mirage. still, it was good to learn there was a verbal form, and three adjectives that all mean the same thing, the best of which is “miraged” (seen in a mirage), simply because it bears the possibility of being confused with the past tense of the verb.

and in brian is wrong department: fellow doctoral student brian tried to tell me that the noun “jaundice” is derived from the verb jaundice, “to tinge yellow.” he’s wrong. also, “to tinge yellow” is a secondary definition for “jaundice, v” whose primary meaning is to give someone jaundice. double wrong!

and in fun words to make up for a boring post department:

1) implausibility: a herd of gnus

2) sanguisugous: blood-sucking; and figurative, bloodsuckingly cruel.