Fancy-pants dinner pals?  You guys are my fancy-pants dinner pals.  Well, honestly, I  live -- like a lot of my fellow Ricochet members -- in a very blue area. So, um, no -- I haven't changed many minds.

And I honestly don't know if my mind had been changed on any specific issue.  I know I've been challenged and provoked and entertained and surprised.  I've been distracted and amused and irritated to suddenly discover that I've "lost" a couple of hours in the middle of a work day catching up on the latest interesting conversation.

What I have done -- and I think what Peter and I set out to do -- was connect with people.  People more conservative that I, people less conservative than I.  But people basically directionally similar to me: people who think government is too big, too intrusive, too inefficient.  That everyone would be better off, better educated, better employed, better raised, better all around with a less powerful state and a more powerful individual and family.  

We don't all march in lockstep.  But we do all try to march with humor and civility and patience with each other.  

In my defense, I didn't sleep in class.  I slept through class.  Meaning: I was still in bed.   So no osmosis necessary.  I speak from blissful ignorance.

Wait, that was you "begging?"  You're the boss, Rich.  

And while I agree with you about the effect of Lincoln -- and his greatness -- I'm not sure I'm with you on two things.  First, I have a hard time believing he'd have allowed Roman Genn to continue to walk free.  

Second, the "tyrant" charge really has its origin, does it not, in the idea that nowhere in the Constitution is it written that states can't secede?  I know this is an unpopular and totally wacky argument -- and it's one I don't necessarily subscribe to, by the way  -- but the union held because we had a war to make it hold.  I'm glad we did, of course, but the Commander in Chief who waged it can be reasonably argued to have overstepped his constitutional authority, can't he?

Or am I opening myself up to a major schooling by you and John Yoo?

If so, lemme have it.

Thanks, Gary.

You know, it's always the same.  I keep forgetting about "opening night," and then I suddenly remember.  In the old days, you'd wake up early to get the ratings from New York by fax.  Now, you just point your browser and hit "refresh" a million times.

Hey, all I'm trying to do here is make 'em laugh.  It ain't Shakespeare.

(But I like to think that he had a pretty hardnosed showbusiness outlook, too....)

I didn't actually vote in this.  I didn't even know about it.  (I tend to toss all mailings from the WGA directly into the bin, such is my feeling towards my labor union.  As you might have guessed...)

The rankings seem silly to me, frankly.  "Cheers" is #8?  Where does that leave "The Honeymooners" or "The Dick Van Dyke Show," both of which made "Cheers" possible?

And you'll never get me to agree to "The West Wing" anywhere on that list.

Yes, essentially.

But we don't usually get the shekels.  Mostly, it's a murder-suicide pact, but with the order reversed.

I have to agree with Pinky.

Hah!  Sadly, true.  

Always a cynic. 

Um, no.  

Yes!  We all lost.  Or, more precisely, I lost, because I was sure there was more coming.

I mean, there is more coming.  I was just sure they'd choose to dump it this weekend.

Although there are some pretty big Supreme Court cases coming up.  Maybe sometime around then....

Two words:  Insanely Jealous!

Two more words:  Vegas Meetup!

Damn.  Sorry.  Working on all of these issues.

We promise:  soon!  All of these issues will be a thing of the past!

They told me that there were moderates in there.

Cheers, Peter.

It's been a wonderful ride.

To many, many more years, many more conversations, and many more members...

Does it make me a bad person that I'm having a celebratory drink?