Where do people in America go when they want to become stars, have their faces planed and carved, where they can wear Daisy Dukes and roll in a 6-4 just like Snoop and Dre and get ready for their close-up, Mr DeMille?
Exactly: Los Angeles.
So how come the Super Bowlin' Seahawks and Broncos are in a metropolis where Peyton Manning and Richard Sherman could walk into any Madison Ave. coffee shop and order up a plate of eggs without hassle from adoring masses; where none of the natives are going to get caught up in the long, drawn-out, fabricated hoopla of a "sporting event"?
Let's put the Super Bowl where it belongs. La La Land.
I read today that the St. Louis Rams, which used to be the NFL's Los Angeles franchise before somehow Los Angeles wound up without an NFL team, have just bought a 60-acre Wal-Mart parcel in Inglewood. The NFL is going to the other Promised Land.
The news comes 48 hours before Sunday's Super Bowl in New Jersey and 72 hours after the quasi-official start of Super Bowl WEEK in New York. I'm not sure the news will big foot the New York Super Bowl, but let's hope this puts an end to Super Bowls in New York.
I Heart New York, but whether or not the Big Apple/Chris Christie Land is the right spot to host the Super Bowl ... I don't buy it. It's not so much about the weather (polar) but about whether New York City is a place that can give proper amplification to the absurdity of the Super Bowl, which is not about a game, but about, well, absurdity.
As Super Bowl WEEK commenced, I asked my brother, iDave, who works near Times Square for The New York Times, what was the Super Bowl scene. He was like: "You know New York. It's like it's not really making a dent."
Say anything you want about New York --that it's expensive, self-important, the self-proclaimed center of the universe -- one thing you have to appreciate about the place is that it can accommodate anything, anyone, and not lose its freaking mind. The city and the people that make New York thrum just don't get bogged down in the mundane details. They got a subway to catch, coffee to buy ("How you want that, light and sweet?") They go about their business and have NO TIME to get knocked off stride by anything, be it a heinous terrorist attack or the NFL's version of a "national holiday."
This is why New Yorkers are purveyors of "anthems" that speak to the bravado of the city, including sentiments about how "if you can make it there you can make it anywhere" (Sinatra) or needing "a little give and take and a trip down the Hudson River line" (Billy Joel) or how "there's nothing you can't do in the concrete jungle where dreams are made" by Jay-Z/Alicia Keys.
This is the city that made Joe Namath "Broadway Joe."
The NFL doesn't take over Manhattan. Manhattan takes over the NFL.
Which is why my proposal is that the Super Bowl should really only be hosted in two places: Los Angeles and Orlando. Tinseltown and Disney World. And since Orlando doesn't have a football stadium big enough to accommodate the Super Bowl, let's just leap ahead and say that once the Rams are in Los Angeles, that every Super Bowl should be held there.
Why? Justin Bieber. The Kardashians. The Real Housewives of Beverly Hills. Million Dollar Listings. Santa Monica. Venice Beach. The Walk of Fame. Universal Studios. Colon cleansing. Date shakes. Katy Perry. Peeling labels off the bottles of Bud. Car washes. The Pointer Sisters. Joan Didion. Frank Ocean. The Getty. Ray-Bans. The Santa Monica Highway. Highway 1. Rodeo Drive. Malibu. Convertibles. Sun. Smog. Surf. Muscle Beach.
The first Super Bowl I ever covered was in 1993 in Los Angeles. The Cowboys vs. the Buffalo Bills. America's Team vs. Marv Levy's Perennial Super Bowl Losers. Goliath vs. David. Michael Irvin and the party animal Cowboys vs. Jim Kelly and the Inferiority Complexes.
I found the column I wrote from Media Day -- my virgin voyage into the Land of the NFL's Mind, Body and Soul Control Event. I included it below, and it speaks to the absurdity of the police escort; how BIlls running back Thurman Thomas wrote Marshawn Lynch's playbook on HATING media day.
The Super Bowl XXVII matchup was a Hollywood script: Biggest, Baddest NFL Team vs. The Lake Effect Underdogs From one of the NFL's tiniest markets in Upstate New York.
The setting was surreal enough to not only accommodate the "drama" but give the whole proceedings wings to fly.
I know there's an allegedly egalitarian reason to spread the Super Bowl love around to cities that want some of the action. But let's be real. Minneapolis? That was cold. Indianapolis? Perhaps one of the most drab, boring cities this side of pre-Wall falling Eastern Germany. Phoenix? It takes 11 hours to drive from Scottsdale to Mesa. New Orleans? OK, the city deserved some love post Katrina but the Big Easy is really the Big Dirty. Charlotte, NC? Please.
I'm certain that threats, dirty deals and abuses of power have been part of the political and governmental process going back to Caligula, or Zeus. But some of us prefer our titans of intemperance to be historical figures, dressed up in hyperbole and embellished with mythic meaning, not some 21st Century, Tea Party-abetted Congressman from Staten Island whose nickname is "Mikey Suits" -- like, straight out of "Goodfellas" or "The Sopranos."
Then again, maybe in 300 years, long after the fall of the American Empire, when all three of the remaining polar bears have found the last ice floe and Jeff Bezos has set up a small colony of Asperger's Anonymous to live with their moon-beam powered Kindles on Mars, U.S. Rep. Michael Grimm (R-Staten Island) will have earned an enduring place in the pantheon of bullies, crooks and ego-maniacal gods.
For anyone who missed it, Grimm is the Congressman who, after President Barack Obama's State of the Union address, took offense to a question from a NY1 reporter who had the audacity to ask about an investigation into alleged campaign contribution fraud. So close he could spit into the reporter's nostrils, Grimm threatened to throw the man off a balcony and, well, break him. "Like a boy."
This is the state of the state, circa 2014. Social media, 24-hour news cycles, divided government, reality TV, a consumer economy married with out-of-control former Marines, sitting governors, U.S. prosecutors and, well, the rest of us have all conspired to make our current and collective mode of behavior a living hell.
Civility? Respect? Discourse? All eradicated under the seething pressures of ... WHAT?
People keep saying these are tough times. Our economy is toast despite the stock market run-up and corporations sitting on billions in cash. Wages are stagnant, the 1 percent has 85 percent of the dough. Immigrants are stuck in limbo; college is unaffordable; jobs are not materializing ... it's all horrendous, horrible, bad.
Except, of course, when you compare us to Kiev, or Greece, or Afghanistan or Syria or any number of other hot spots around the world where the world is literally engulfed in flames, blood and misery.
Yet somehow, in America, we have the audacity to fight like steroid-juiced wrestlers mugging for the TV cameras, which is funny since our "greatest" commodity is our slavish devotion to our 15-Minutes-of-Fame "ideal."
I don't believe we are a nation of thugs. I see too many people in daily, ordinary life doing daily, extraordinary acts of kindness for their friends, families or communities. We aren't a nation of lawless people, and there's still enough connection to previous generations of Americans who really had to fight or suffer for us to forget that we ought to work hard and try and play fair. Yet somehow, the infrastructure of power and so many of the people who decide to participate in that arena can't avoid descending into Hades to carry out whatever notion of power they think comes along with it.
Accelerating the fury and distrust and hair-trigger emotion of our national "discourse" is the commentary, the chatter, the "analysis" of it all, which only amplifies the noise and elevates its meaning and alleged importance to such outsized and demoralizing proportion.
Speaking of outsized and demoralizing proportion: Take Chris Christie. As the New Jersey governor lawyers up against abuse of power charges connected to Bridgegate and Sandy funds, there's new reporting that says Christie was so greedily eager to PROVE his popularity as a "both sides of the aisle" Republican in order to boost his 2016 presidential credentials that he might have been tempted to do anything necessary to run up the vote tally in his recent re-election.
The New York Times: They were part of what one high-ranking Republican called “the crew” around Mr. Christie: friends who strategized at Mr. Christie’s kitchen table in Mendham and socialized with him in the governor’s box at MetLife Stadium.
Then there is the ground-to-a-halt endgame of the absurd, partisan divide in Washington D.C., where Republicans vowed to obstruct every Obama initiative, which has now led to Obama's Year 6 State of the Union address in which he vowed to go solo with every power available to him, since Congress will not act on anything that really matters to the American people.
Is Obama finally seizing his presidential pulpit, only to have his foes call it a bully pulpit, denying his presidential authority? Does Obama's "vow" only serve to escalate the underlying sense that everyone's gone rogue in this country? Or is Obama's "threat" that he will move on his own another attempt to smoke out his most violent detractors in order to expose their blind hatred and opposition to him? Look at Ted Cruz and others now emboldened to paint Obama (again) as other, as an "imperial ruler" set out to destroy America?
Are we supposed to be able to navigate all these threats and understand our path forward? I am beginning to lose hope, since our so-called American "exceptionalism" has been replaced by our newest form of cultural expressionism: American Bully-ism.
Gonna break you. Like a boy.
Smoking Gun For Bridgegate? Might Rest With Losing Bidder In Fort Lee's $1B Hudson Lights Development
Someone that I know and respect who essentially ran a big Northeast state as a key aide to a certain governor likes to paint Chris Christie's Bridgegate scandal like this:
The lane closures were a warning shot across the bow.
The idea that no one in the Christie administration, including Christie and chief politico David Samson, knows anything about why the lanes were closed is akin to a dead zebra being laid out near a watering hole and all the baboons sitting around the watering hole bleat out lies about how they have seen no lions. Not one!
Yet it's not credible. We all know: Where there's a dead carcass, there are predators.
The scenario that no lions wanted to come nosh on Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich's $1 billion dead zebra called Hudson Lights is not believable. The way we see it is simple:
Chris Christie and his top donors were angry. They had to be. Here was a billion-dollar development deal taking place in Fort Lee, promising developers and potential residents easy access to the George Washington Bridge, all under the direction of a Democratic Mayor, Mark Sokolich, who had finally put a long-dormant piece of supremely pricey real estate into position for hosting two 5-story buildings, plus retail space for restaurants, shops and movie theaters.
Fort Lee was going to kick ass, and be the epicenter of one of the biggest development deals in the state. And who was in charge of giving out all those contracts for architecture, engineering, bond work, legal work? Why, it would be Fort Lee's mayor. It's a lot of power and money attached to development deals like this. It stands to reason that other people, especially a governor and his re-election campaign staff who were drunk on power might have felt a little emboldened to show Fort Lee just who's boss.
New Jersey has had a lot of bosses, all of them a little scary, except Bruce Springsteen, who has also had a few things to sing about Chris Christies' Fort Lee Traffic Nightmare.
I know we are getting ahead of ourselves, since the smoking gun has yet to be found -- and subpoenas coming from the N.J. Legislature and other investigatory bodies are just getting ready to roll off the presses. The details behind Bridgegate will likely come out, once at least one key actor is given immunity in exchange for the down low on what went down. We know David Wildstein, the lane-closure-orderer as disclosed in released documents and emails -- wants immunity. He already asked the Jersey lawmakers, who had no authority at the time to grant him the freedom to sing in exchange for no jail time. But in due time ... it will come out.
Until then, it's just not possible. Chris Christie's staffers did not just decide to play a "prank" on Fort Lee. It's not plausible that they decided to light a match for the sheer "fun" of it only to have the house burn down. It's not plausible that there's no significant underlying reason for the stupid and dangerous lane closures, or that Gov. Chris Christie or New Jersey powerbroker David Samson, the Port Authority appointee, knew nothing about what was going on, or why.
I just don't buy it. It's not how things work, or don't work. The No. 1 rule of politics is "Follow The Money."
In the case of Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich's $1 billion development of the 16-acre tract of land directly near the George Washington Bridge, it is impossible to ignore this huge deal as a motivating factor for retribution.
When Tucker Development Corp. bought one half of the 16-acre site, Fort Lee still had to find a plan for the entire parcel. This is where the intrigue rests: Tucker owned half and decided to develop its portion. Meanwhile, Fort Lee was still looking for ideas, and bidders for the second parcel. To see who might have help goad Chris Christie and/or David Samson into screwing with local access lanes to the GW Bridge in Fort Lee, it might be time to look at the losing bids for the Hudson Lights deal. Did any of these people want revenge for not getting some of the action?
On Oct. 16, a month after Bridgegate lane closures, Sokolich and Tucker Development, along with other partners in the development project, broke ground in Fort Lee. Here's what Mayor Sokolich said:
“This administration is committed to forging business-friendly policies and partnerships aimed to position Fort Lee as a sought-after destination in the tri-state area for decades to come,” Mayor Sokolich said. “Hudson Lights is exactly the kind of large-scale, forward-thinking project that will help us realize that objective.”
That statement smacks of subliminal messaging. The mayor wants "business-friendly policies and partnerships" which could mean he doesn't want any of the old "business-as-usual" shenanigans that kept the 16-acre parcel in the hands of the mob and other undesirables for decades.
Here are the winners in Mayor Sokolich's development deal:
It begs the question: Which firms were the losers in this coveted and hard-won development Hudson Lights project? One of the firms that bid on developing the entire 16-acre parcel, which was split into two phases of development, was Silverstein Properties in conjunction with Taubman Centers. Silverstein is the World Trade Center developer. It was Silverstein's bid to develop the entire parcel, including the Tucker piece. But it appears that Tucker wanted to keep its piece and develop it themselves.
The New York Times outlined the deal in this 2009 article, including some minor details about what each bidder had in mind for the site.
"Tucker’s ownership of the eight acres on the west. ... Mr. Tucker made it clear in an interview that his company intended not to sell its property but to develop it — though perhaps in concert with partners,'' the Times reported in 2009.
Oddly, the NYTimes has not noted the development site as a potential issue in the strangest retribution scenario ever to involve the world's busiest bridge, a GOP presidential frontrunner and lane closures.
Larry Silverstein was a long-term client of David Samson.
Mayor Sokolich was called "an idiot" by one of Christie's key staffers, now fired. Mayor Sokolich has had some fun calling himself "the idiot" who has spearheaded Fort Lee's progressive moves, including this landmark development deal. The level of animosity in this "war" goes far deeper than anything having to do with a failure by Sokolich to endorse Chris Christie's re-election. That alone just is not a plausible reason for the timing and nature of the lane-closure retribution.
But a billion dollars in development, and all the contracts that come with it? That could get someone really "sauced," as Christie admits he sometimes gets over things having to do with Fort Lee and the GW Bridge.
It has also come to our attention that Chris Christie DOES know how to play bridge hardball. He did it with the Port Authority and Larry Silverstein over WTC subsidies.
From the New York Daily News:
New Jersey pols struck a $1 billion back-room deal with the Port Authority as their price for supporting a breakthrough pact to restore the World Trade Center, it was revealed Tuesday.
After days of rampant speculation about why Gov. Chris Christie's top staffers -- many of whom have quit or been fired -- ordered lane closures on the George Washington Bridge to punish Fort Lee, NJ, Fred Sokolich said he is still unsure why Fort Lee was the target.
Fred Sokolich is a real estate broker in Fort Lee. He is also the brother of Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich, who is a real estate attorney. The brothers are close and work together in the same office building. But even now they do not have a concrete reason for why the four-day lane closure was ordered. Fred Sokolich disputes theories that say judicial nominations and confirmations were the cause, just as he disputes that the Hudson Lights development project was the cause for retribution.
"My suspicion is that it's because my brother did not endorse the governor in the election, and I don't know why the development project would be part of the deal. That piece of land has been dormant for 40 years. It's been through much litigation, many changes of ownership but now it's up and going with two 50-story buildings going up. Who wouldn't want to see that project move along? It's going to bring a renaissance to Fort Lee with shops and restaurants and a hotel,'' Fred Sokolich said.
The theory about sabotage to the real estate development on the 16-acre Hudson Lights lot at the foot of the GW Bridge was brought to light this weekend. Steve Kornacki of MSNBC advanced the idea of potential sabotage to the access lanes in Fort Lee. The billion-dollar project, whose financing was being wrapped up at the same time as the Sept. 9-12 lane closure mess was playing out, depends on access lanes in the city of Fort Lee that feed directly to the bridge.
But Fred Sokolich said that while access lanes in Fort Lee are important to the developers of the site, it's wrong to consider those lanes specifically designated to Fort Lee.
"That's a misnomer. Those lanes serve people from 40, 50 or 60 towns nearby that all feed through Fort Lee through main arteries. The percentage of drivers from Fort Lee that use those lanes is like 2.5 percent. People are coming from many other towns to use those lanes,'' he said.
Sokolich and his mayor brother have discussed the scandal numerous times, he said, but Fred said they're no closer to understanding the real reason why Fort Lee was targeted.
"It's going to come out. We'll know soon enough. There are too many eyeballs, too many people looking into this now. There are investigations being run, including one now by the Department of Transportation. There is no logical explanation for why it happened, but the truth will come out. The truth will set you free,'' Sokolich said.
As a real estate writer for the Zillow blog, we decided to write a piece about the city of Fort Lee, since the New Jersey city is the epicenter of the Chris Christie bridge lane closing scandal. And what we found in Fort Lee was Fred Sokolich, the real estate broker brother of Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich. He answered the phone and gave me a good interview about the city and the bridge and the future of housing in Fort Lee.
Zillow is the online real estate site that delivers millions of data points on homes and property across the United States. In the blog, we write real estate news, so this Fort Lee incident sounded like a good way to feature the city. We had no idea that real estate development might be the underlying factor to Bridgegate, but apparently the wagons are circling around a key development parcel and critical access to that parcel via designated bridge lanes for Fort Lee.
Fred Sokolich, whose Sokolich Real Estate Enterprises is the No. 1 rental broker in northern N.J., said he was flummoxed at the way the land closures were used as retribution against Fort Lee.
In connection to the bridge scandal, many mentions have been made to Fort Lee's renaissance, which features a land parcel at the foot of the GWB , where a major, billion-dollar development is taking place. Hudson Lights is the name of the development. I think we will know a lot more about it in days to come.
What has been one of the more striking elements of the scandal is the idea that the lane closures that snarled traffic for four days in September was payback for Mark Sokolich, a Democrat, for not endorsing Republican Chris Christie for governor. Christie and Sokolich have been pretty forthright in saying that lack of endorsement was not an issue. Then what was?
Rachel Maddow suggested that fights over reappointments to the New Jersey State Supreme Court were possibly the reason, since Christie and Democratic State Sen. Loretta Weinberg, whose district includes Fort Lee, were in a death squabble over who would or would not be reappointed, or confirmed.
Well, maybe yes. Maybe no -- especially when there is now reason to cast a critical eye toward the billion-dollar development that Mayor Mark Sokolich has helped make happen after decades of Jersey-style corruption and shenanigans over the Hudson Lights parcel in Fort Lee, right under the GW Bridge.
From the Bergen Record, dated Sept. 16, 2013, immediately after the 4-day Bridgegate episode that, there's this report.
The long-awaited Hudson Lights luxury development in Fort Lee that was delayed this summer has secured financing for the project, which will get under way next month,officials said Monday.
Having covered politics in New York and Pennsylvania for the Albany Times Union and the Patriot-News, it certainly seems as if it is well within the bounds of PLAUSIBLE -- given the kinds of dollars and players involved in deals like these -- that this real estate development deal is exactly the kind of issue that would cause political operatives to go wilding on a retribution scheme.
For instance, bond deals are always fodder for jealousy and shenanigans, because of the fees involved in generating the financing. What about the bond deal for Hudson Lights, as secured by Tucker Construction via banking giant Sovereign Santander? It's just one place to scratch around on to see if somehow, there are threads to be pulled. Retribution like closing bridge lanes may sound like stupidity, as Christie tried to characterize it. But it could be far worse and intentional that stupidity.
The key, going forward, will be to outline the background of this real estate development project. Nothing of this magnitude gets done anywhere without a lot of hands in the pot, or a lot of actors feeling like they may or may not have gotten their share of the deal.
Fort Lee is not just an exit off the GW Bridge, as Fred Sokolich emphasized. It is a city. It is a real place. It sits directly on the Hudson, facing New York City, and provides easy access to one of the most expensive cities in the world for development and real estate. With the economic collapse of 2008 behind us, Fort Lee real estate is up 13 percent or more in the last year. It is going to go up another 4 percent in 2014, according to Zillow analytics. This is a playground not only for politicians and bridge commuters, but developers doing deals worth millions.
My interest in Fort Lee is only more piqued now. Steve Kornacki of MSNBC has apparently today linked the New Jersey players surrounding the GW Bridge scandal and the development deal.
But given the mafia connections to some aspects of the land now being developed courtesy of Mayor Mark Sokolich's Hudson Lights project, I'm glad I am currently in Seattle.
It was a little odd when Mayor Sokolich of Fort Lee went on all the news stations last Thursday and Friday after the Chris Christie press conference and apology tour of Fort Lee, saying the only thing he asked Christie for was that no more retribution take place.
Um, what? More? Why?
Stay tuned ...
Unlike the woman who ate nothing except food from Starbucks for an entire year, my life has no meaning, but at least my mouth and stomach did not suffer a 365-day forced march into the valley of pre-packaged monotony.
I heard about this woman's "feat" on the radio the other morning, just as the 2014 new year was cranking into gear. I love New Year's, mostly because it means Christmas is over and because there's a wide open canvas that holds all kinds of promise and freedom. And unlike Beautiful Existence, which is apparently the REAL NAME of the woman who devoured only Starbucks food in 2013, I am incapable of lashing myself to the psychic or physical gymnastics that comes with such outrageously specific "resolutions."
In 2013, I think I might have eaten two articles of food from Howard Schultz's little chain of coffee shops, both of them involving egg sandwiches. For the most part, however, my year of eating (unlike B. Existence's) included some pretty sensational and taste bud titillating experiences, including at least 11 trips to a vegetarian Indian restaurant called Udapi Cafe, which serves to most tongue-tingling marsala paneer and tomato chutney; the singularly most fabulous Manhattan variation laced with apricot liquer (the Colonel) at Rob Roy; a duck confit salad at Maximilien's in Pike Place Market and approximately 7 servings of the lemongrass grilled pork bun at Monkey Bridge in Ballard. I could go on, but in deference to B. Existence, whose palate must have blanched into a bed of styrofoam after so many Starbucks luncheons, I'll suffice to say that my eating in 2013 was the aurora borealis to her Pluto -- the little planet that was so sadly reassigned single star status.
As for Starbuck's role for my culinary needs in 2013: One of the two items I ate was some kind of egg white and spinach wrap, which a barista handcrafted for me in the industrial-strength microwave; the other was an egg salad sandwich, which was prepackaged in crinkly cellophane, allowing me to turn it over and over in my indecisive little hands. This was an EMERGENCY fueling, so in both instances my first order of priority was 1) protein and 2) price. The wrap was a decent deal, since it slid down with a minimum of effort.
The egg salad sandwich was more dicey: It was laden with mayonnaise and therefore fat content, and stuffed between two thick slices of high-carb, whole-grain bread. I am sure Howard Schultz, slim from all that biking and possibly veganism, would not be caught dead eating one of his egg salad sandwiches, which, if I recall correctly, has about 25 grams of fat, and about 35 percent of your daily requirement of saturated fat.
But beyond those two forays into the culinary re-launching of Starbucks food offerings, it was a no-go. Ever since Starbucks started advertising that their pumpkin scones were riddled with 640 calories (or thereabouts) and that the morning glory muffins were dripping with about 18 grams of fat, we've sworn off the baked goods. And as for the little see-through containers of cheese hunks and grapes: I would rather dig around in the bottom of my POCKABOOK for an errant almond than pay $5.95 for a midget-sized cheese tray.
The entire idea of eating only Starbucks food has me quite perplexed, if not aghast. I mean, why? The news of this woman's Starbucks' "feat" literally sent me to Google, where on January 5, me and my little family decided to end the Winter Break with an exodus to whatever Yelp and other reference sites said was the best dumpling house in all of the greater Seattle area. It was there, with our dear friends from Boston, that we huddled over a big, round table at Din Tai Fung's in Bellevue, where in the kitchen a small army of dumpling makers and noodle rollers were truly handcrafting tasty treats whose origins are from Taiwan.
The place was packed. The food was endless. We could not have felt more elated and lucky. Free to eat and celebrate the coming new year, with no ridiculously restrictive dietary fabrications! Our New Year's resolution for 2014 was to eat MORE of MORE kinds of foods, starting right then and there, in spite of Beautiful Existence and Howard Schultz.
In the dimming light of the winter evening, we eagerly marked off our little black and white sheet of menu paper, calling for bamboo steam bins filled with juicy pork dumplings; chicken fried rice; sauteed string beans in garlic sauce and more dumplings and wontons, slathering them in the fresh ginger and soy and vinegar dipping sauce. The wait staff never blinked as we sent them back to the kitchen for another order of pork and vegetable dumplings, or more fried noodle or Shanghai cakes that the kids could not stop devouring. We were pigs, gluttons, drooling our own saliva along with the hot soupy juice oozing from the pillowy dough.
You know what the dumplings told us?
That the universe is endless. The palate insatiable. The eyes and nostrils are open.
Egg salad? Scones? Ha!
Is a former political and sports columnist who worked great cities like Albany NY, Seattle, Baltimore and Harrisburg PA. She lives New York.