As a former model-maker in the theater biz, I have the skills to craft a miniature wheelhouse of a tugboat, about 4" high. Inside it will be the figures of the bride and groom, to go on top of the wedding cake in the traditional fashion.

So that wheelhouse is totally in your wheelhouse!

That sounds stellar. Best wishes to you and your daughter and family.

And so I completely missed the Senate vote the other day, before reading Chris's column that commented on the vote as if we'd all heard the news!

I won't tease you if you're still so busy you missed the red hot news of the House passing the Bad Big Bill, and with that nugget, this non-affiliated Independent voter will never ever again vote for any Republican. Screw every one of them for lying to voters.

Outside politics... oh, boy! I would wager we would all like to hear more of this story. Spill it, John. ;)

Briefly, I have a week off from work this week. I have been using the time to make a 'cake-topper' for my daughter's upcoming wedding later this month.

As a former model-maker in the theater biz, I have the skills to craft a miniature wheelhouse of a tugboat, about 4" high. Inside it will be the figures of the bride and groom, to go on top of the wedding cake in the traditional fashion.

Why a tugboat wheelhouse? My future son-in-law is captain of a tugboat operating out of Boston; he sent me a set of research photos of the interior with all its fascinating details for me to craft in 1/24 scale (1/2" = 1'-0").

So, I've been intensely focused on this miniatures project for three or four days now - off line and "outside politics" much more than than is usual for me. And so I completely missed the Senate vote the other day, before reading Chris's column that commented on the vote as if we'd all heard the news!

In retrospect, you're absolutely right.

In retrospect, I was absolutely teasing you, John (not to be confused with the other John -- and hey -- where is the other John?).

But as I noted, I was not aware the final vote had actually taken place. So I read those same words that you've bolded as meaning only that Murkowski had publically made a decision about how she was going to vote, when the vote actually took place in some future time!

That definitely explains Dot 1, John, but that leaves Dot 2 a.k.a. "after her vote" completely left out of the equation, n'est-ce pas?

Yes, I got it eventually. But mentally I was not in the same news space as Chris was when he wrote this very involved and inside-politics piece.

There are eight million stories in the naked city....

I was outside politics at the time, as it were, having missed the story of the actual final Senate vote due to being offline for, oh, a couple of hours yesterday afternoon.

Outside politics... oh, boy! I would wager we would all like to hear more of this story. Spill it, John. ;)

So I guess my plea relates to cutting-edge columns based on red-hot news flashes: please fill us in in case we missed it just now.

Red-Hot Breaking News:

- Pimp Daddy found guilty on two counts of being a... pimp.
- Murderer in Idaho pleads guilty to being a... murderer.
- Votes in House on Bad Big Bill finds GOP currently short of... votes.
- Stupid 1849 abortion law struck down by WI Supreme Court for being... stupid.

Heh. :)

In retrospect, you're absolutely right.

But as I noted, I was not aware the final vote had actually taken place. So I read those same words that you've bolded as meaning only that Murkowski had publically made a decision about how she was going to vote, when the vote actually took place in some future time!

Yes, I got it eventually. But mentally I was not in the same news space as Chris was when he wrote this very involved and inside-politics piece. I was outside politics at the time, as it were, having missed the story of the actual final Senate vote due to being offline for, oh, a couple of hours yesterday afternoon.

So I guess my plea relates to cutting-edge columns based on red-hot news flashes: please fill us in in case we missed it just now.

that reads like something Donald would say - simultaneously taking both sides of the issue.

It's a feature of prophets and con artists who fancy themselves prophetic but who know deep down their tank is actually empty yet somehow totally full of bullshit. ;)

Alrighty, then. I direct you to Sentence 2:

Senator Lisa Murkowski was convinced at the last minute to become the deciding vote for the Republican budget by the inclusion of a big tax break for (are you sitting down?) whaling captains....

A few sentences later:

Immediately after her vote, Murkowski cried...

Bold emphasis added.

Now we expect Republicans and so-called "conservatives" to be totally unable to connect the dots; you, on the other hand, are far too intelligent for that. :)

That is, at the very end of the piece, I finally read "it took the vice president to cast a tie-breaking vote (making it 51-50)" and realized, oh, I get it. The Senate passed their version of the budget bill.

So all that stuff about Murkowski and Collins and the gang and whaling and SNAP was centered on the final vote for the bill, not the ongoing negotiations, position-taking, vote-a-rama, and all the other punditry about the bill that's occupied the news for the last week or so. It all blends together after a couple of days of reading several political blogs regularly.

So, could I humbly ask, give us a quick lead on the actual news before commenting on it?

They always forget the hyphen! Heh. ;)

She then pulled a card out that was just laughable -- Murkowski said that she has every hope that the House will now fix all the problems with the bill (the bill that she just voted to pass, without those fixes).

Well, well, what's signed, is signed; and what's to be, will be; and then again, perhaps it won't be, after all.

~ Elijah, Moby-Dick, Ch. 19