Help me with this one

As I was driving home this evening, I glanced up, as always, at the pedestrian bridge over Campus Drive. You don't need to pick up the paper in Madison to figure out what's playing in the theater or concert hall; all you need to do is look up at the bridge and you will see signs announcing anything from jazz artists, to musical hits, or the coming of any number of noteworthy performers.

But what I saw today was a guy holding up a huge sign that read: "NO MORE SOUR JUICE."

What am I missing here? It's one of those things that's lost in translation, right? Probably everyone else is driving home and thinking "yeah, no more of that stuff, right on!" Or, is it that the person with the sign was complaining that there is no more sour juice to be found anywhere, it's all sweet, damn it! Or what -- an irreverent rock band, aka Sour Juice, that should not be permitted entry into our concert halls or nightclubs? Truly, I'm in the dark.

If you know the significance of this, write me. My ignorance is killing me.

Need a spouse? Try the cemetery

According to GWB, your mate must be of the opposite sex. But we have an unresolved question here: must s/he be alive?
In France, the answer is no. For example, a certain Ms. Demichel married a dead man just last week (NYT, the paper of record, so reported)– perfectly legitimate according to French law. She carried flowers, there was a wedding cake, they say the only thing missing was the groom.

A honeymoon? Yes, of sorts –she’s going to visit her new mother-in-law. Her new dead husband died in an accident two years back. But she’ll keep his ashes in her bedroom. The mayor, who presided over the ceremony, did ask if she wanted to “exchange” rings in some manner, but the bride politely declined.

Scheming minds

CNN is speculating about the possibility of a new alliance between Edwards and Dean (and therefore also Gore). It makes sense. Edwards is short on money, and desperate to win in New York. Could it be that Gore will announce a shift in favor of Edwards this week-end? A CNN public preference poll, conducted before Tuesday, indicates that both Kerry and Edwards are currently favored over Bush.

As if all this wasn’t intriguing enough, I read today (NYT) that according to a survey (okay, I suppose that goes without saying), 9% of the primary vote in Wisconsin was cast by Republicans. One has to wonder – who did they vote for and why?

United

At a meeting of the neighborhood book group last night politics crept into the conversation (okay, were forced into the conversation by me). It was shocking, exhilarating, astonishing to hear how many (most?) had voted for Edwards. One had even given Kucinich a plug. You have to understand that many of these women are not on the same end of the political spectrum: Some have crossed over and connected the arrow pointing to a Republican in the past, others have been decidedly moderate Democrats, and still others have been known to waffle about which party to support (okay, ms exception, I know who you are and I know your record is unscathed by any GOP leanings, but admit that I am correct about the others). If a candidate would openly speak in favor of raising taxes, s/he’d lose at least half of them right then and there.

But last night, it became evident that these past voting patterns were nothing but youthful indiscretions, all forgotten, ignored now as visions of a future without GWB tantalizingly danced through their heads. A united front of Democrats? Never thought it could happen, but there it is.