In Bill James' Historical Abstract, Jim Baker said in reference to Jim Bouton's Ball Four "I wonder if baseball historians a hundred years from now will appreciate the research possibilities of Jim Bouton's Ball Four... Historians who dust off this book a hundred years from now will get an account of the only season of a team called the Seattle Pilots." That is an unusual image that has always stuck with me and is far from the least interesting of the praises I have read about one of my favorite books. Ball Four is full of intimate information about players that we would otherwise never think about again, but all of whom, thanks to the book, are instead immortalized in history.

In the same regard, EEEEEE!has always contained a treasure trove of interesting and intimate information about the San Francisco Giants of the late twentieth century. It could well be that baseball historians, when they are looking back on the period just prior to the start of a thirty year domination of major league baseball by those same Giants, will turn to the accounts of these seasons contained in EEEEEE!for the clues as to how it all came to happen. They will need to because, as we know, no professional sporting media publication of national scope pays any attention to the Giants in any way, and the Bay Area media has no focus on the Giants beyond wanting to get rid of the best player on the team. Where else would the information reside?

(Of course, there is the problem of maintaining all this information online, since Gregg has noted several times that he has run out of room on his server and is yanking off stuff left and right; but, as he points out, it is all still on disk. It will all work out somehow. He owes it to history, after all.)

When Gregg mentioned to me in an e-mail that he was going to take December off from his weekly season's notes, my first reaction was complete sympathy and understanding. Those articles are long, and I have no idea how he pulls them off week after week. (The few long articles I have written for EEEEEE!routinely took me at least a week of fairly continuous effort to write, and I started my 1997 recap in late August just to try to get it done within a few days after the end of the season. Considering how dramatically things swung back and forth during that race in September, you would probably not be surprised to hear that I rewrote the introduction to that article four different times.) When Gregg offered me the option of writing something just to help keep the site active in December, I willingly agreed, but only on the condition that I would not have to write up any seasons' notes, which seemed too daunting a task.

However, as the days went past, three things worked to change my mind. First, the above sentiment of maintaining the historical record, though tongue in cheek, still seemed important to me. Second, there is a certain informality to the seasons' notes that seemed kind of intriguing to try to write (in other words, I could be slightly less bombastic than normal). And, finally, the Giants were doing so little during the offseason that the odds of this being a strenuous project seemed low. When haiku could dominate a whole week of activity on the Giants' newsgroup (though, sadly for me, not this week), and when the boldest move by the Giants has been to add Alan Embree, the chances of me having to work hard did not appear to be overwhelming.

Plus, we all do like to see our thoughts immortalized in here, I think. That's important too.

If it weren't for the regular hatchet jobs on Barry Bonds, I suspect that the national media wouldn't pay any attention to the team at all.

This year, I suppose part of the reason for the inattention is the same thing that has turned this offseason into a snooze-fest for Giants' fans; fundamentally, when it comes to news, the team has been pretty boring. Consider the hard hitting moves the team has made during the two-plus months since the end of the season:

• Re-signed free agents Mark Gardner and Ellis Burks

• Traded Dante Powell for Embree

• Signed Marvin Bernard to a two-year deal

• Picked up the options on J. T. Snow, Charlie Hayes, and Julian Tavarez

• Declined the options on Rey Sanchez and Orel Hershiser

• Signed Greg Hansell as a free agent (just this week, in fact)

Now, in an offseason dominated by some of the bigger free-agent names (Mike Piazza, Bernie Williams, Randy Johnson, and Mo Vaughn, just to name a few) in history, and one in which such luminaries as Denny Neagle, Brett Boone, Ricky Bottalico, Todd Hundley, Charles Johnson, and Bobby Bonilla changed hands, this is very slim pickings indeed. Granted, the Giants played decently after they traded for Burks last year, but it was hardly a team for the ages (in fact, it was one of the most frustrating Giants teams with a winning record in all of my thirty-plus years of following them) and it is pretty hard to see standing pat as a strong strategic play for 1999.

Well, granted, dumping Sanchez (if they do indeed see that through) is probably worth two or three more wins, but beyond that....

So, if you were the national media, what could you find intriguing about the Giants as they head into the 1999 season? Probably very little.

Things are probably only going to get worse. Heck, once Barry Bonds retires, that same media likely won't even spend any time running the Giants down. Now, the pending emergence of the new Pac Bell Park (the first privately financed baseball stadium since Dodger Stadium in the early '60s) could in theory provide a wealth of positive exposure for the franchise, but don't count on it. From all indications, the national media is wanting to look at the whole thing as a millstone around the team's ability to compete, while ignoring the socially significant and generally positive statement being made about how stadiums should be financed and built. And the good people of San Francisco, in their zeal to ruin the whole thing for themselves and the rest of us if at all possible, will reinforce that type of thinking by continuing to bitch and moan about whatever methods the Giants are using to finance the thing as opposed to thanking their lucky stars that they aren't having to pony up for it out of their taxes. So what should be a real point of pride for Giants fans will instead simply add weight to the general feeling of anxiety that most of us feel when contemplating the future of our favorite baseball team while giving us no sense of esteem at all.

Actually, the Giants really had better be at the start of a successful thirty-year run, or it may soon really suck to be a Giants fan. Not that this hasn't been mostly true over the last thirty years, of course.

I'm sold. (By the way, he had an 8-3 record to go with that 3.00 ERA at AAA Omaha.)

"Is there any reason to think he wouldn't continue his long trek down the path of tweakdom? It would appear that he is -- and I say this with all due respect, for he may be a fine human being -- such a waste of time and money that Baseball Prospectus chose not to even mention him this year. Last year's book says that the Dodgers gave up on him 'because he could not throw a useful curve.' This guy is, at best, a spring-training invitee, one who might fill a Fresno spot because somebody has to. But he gets a major league deal.

"We've signed our free-agent pitcher. Everybody sigh with relief."

Well, maybe not everyone is in a better mood than I. And with Orel pretty much for sure looking like he is not coming back, I think we can safely assume our rotation is about to get a lot younger, if not necessarily better. So, I hope this is not the last move the Giants make this year related to the starting rotation.

Perhaps. The Dodgers did trade for Todd Hundley, which could be great or a disaster depending on his health, but they also traded Roger Cedeno to make way for newly signed free agent Devon White, which is kind of confusing. Jim, after expressing some concern about the likely value to the Dodgers of their new manager Davey Johnson, asked, "Did any of you read the Sports Illustrated piece on Bernie Williams last week? The thrust was the number of reservations baseball folks have about him. Among these folks, Dodger GM [Kevin] Malone... said that he targeted Devon White as opposed to entering the Williams race because they were 'comparable players' and Devo was a third cheaper.

"Comparable players? Unless he meant that in comparison to the .575 slugging Williams, the 36-year-old White hits like he has no arms, this strikes me as an obscene level of stupidity. Or, in other words... good news."

I agree that any signs of stupidity from the Dodgers organization would be very good news indeed. Still, Vartan (a well-spoken Dodger fan) defended the move and Malone, noting that the Dodgers are trying to land Kevin Brown and "I think it's to early to pass judgment on Malone. He built an excellent team in Montreal. If he signs Brown you may have to change your assessment to... bad news."

Which I would. (The Rockies and, of course, the Padres also lust after Brown, and him signing with any one of these teams would be unhappy news for the Giants.)

Jesse replied "I think Malone is decent, but he didn't build the ballclub in Montreal -- to a much greater degree he inherited it in the form of an incredible farm system, courtesy of Dave Dombrowski." (This is what I usually wonder when I hear about what a great job Brian Sabean did building up the farm system with the Yankees; how much of it did he inherit?)

Getting back to Arizona, Billy noted "Don't sweat the Diamondbacks, though. Their lineup is still full of aging stiffs. They'll finish fifth again. Okay, maybe fourth, ahead of the Dodgers."

Compared to all of the above sentiment, Eric was almost giddy: "First of all, the good news is that Johnson is signing with Arizona and not LA. Also, we have to be happy that Mo [Vaughn] and Bernie won't be in the division. With their three pitching acquisitions, Arizona just jumped about 20 games in the standings to a .500 or slightly better club. Assuming Kevin Brown signs with the Rockies, the Pads will free fall. If he stays in San Diego, the Pads still will not be the team they were last year. Brown signing with the Rockies is not enough to push them to the top. LA has not bettered itself significantly, and the Giants could be better by five to 10 games if they stay healthy."

Wow. With all due respect to Eric, I have a very hard time seeing that kind of improvement, no matter how much better they were last year once Burks got on board. I agree that the Padres will probably fall off and only the Diamondbacks have clearly improved themselves thus far, but to see this team at between 94 and 99 wins in 1999 is hard for me to do. In fairness, Eric did continue, "All in all, the Giants will be contenders for the division but probably will not get past that stage without some more pop or a couple more strong arms -- they have been talking about going young, so maybe it is time for some prospects to step up, assuming Sabean doesn't trade them all."

Now, compared to Eric, Ethan was positively giddy: "The case I'm making is that the Giants, beginning in August, have gotten better. And given either the events or situations of our competitors, we stand a very good chance to win this division. If we're going to go anywhere in the playoffs, though, we will definitely need Estes to be dominant once more, Gardner to come up with another late-season surge, Ortiz to adjust more, and Rueter to pitch like he did at the end of '97. [Trainer Mark] Letendre needs to find out how to reform that blister on Rueter's finger.

"Yeah, Hundley would be cool, too. We get him, and Benard will hit .400 at leadoff."

Well, the former won't happen now, and I doubt Ethan really believes in the latter possibility either, no matter whom the Giants might land.

Billy, our resident Braves fan, weighed in with this prediction: "I always wait till the end of spring training to make my picks, but the Giants look good at this point. Will be Giants or Pads. Pads if they keep Brown, probably Giants if they don't. I think the world of Davey Johnson, but you can't make chicken salad out of, well, anything but chicken salad. Far-too-early predictions: Giants, Padres (separated by no more than five games), Rockies, Diamondbacks, Dodgers. Although that last one may be just wishful thinking."

The first one frankly seems like wishful thinking as well, at least to me. Want something else to worry about? Bruce Jenkins, in the San Francisco Chronicle on December 5, noted that the Giants will be the favorite in the NL West if Brown leaves the division and Roger Clemens isn't traded into it. So, we have the no-win situation of (a) having to compete against those guys, or (b) having to deal with the probably low likelihood of a Bruce Jenkins' prediction coming true. Boy, if the Giants would just give in to his wishes to dump Barry Bonds, Jenkins would probably pick them for the World Series right now. Especially if Joe Carter could somehow be talked out of retirement to replace him in left field.

Now, Billy wrote this before Clark signed with the Orioles for two years at $11 million (more on that in a moment), but it generated a few interesting discussions worth recapping here. To me, it has always been kind of surprising that there is so little nostalgia for the Will Clark days, considering he had what was probably the most dramatic hit in San Francisco playoff history. Plus, he had an interesting flair, a memorable face and the Giants generally performed well during his years here. Plus, he used the f-word on a television postgame show and got away with it.

Jesse responded "I don't know about Clark. I loved him when he was with the Giants, but the dude isn't much of a player anymore, and he wants to stay in Texas. Plus, he purportedly said he didn't consider my main man Boogie Bear Mitchell black, because he was such a good hitter. That's the sort of comment that's just inexcusable. Imagine what would have happened if Albert Belle said something like that about a white guy."

Ah, the race thing (and, by the way, I am not criticizing Jesse for mentioning it). I think this will always hang over Clark's head here, even though I would suspect that most of the comments he was accused of making in that regard probably arose more from his being youthfully ignorant than any rabid racial hatred. I think that the perception that he was racist made it a little harder for Giants fans to feel good about rooting for Clark the player, and thus easier to accept his leaving, even though I don't know that he was a disruptive force in the dugout because of whatever behavior he was exhibiting.

Billy noted, "But he seemed to get along well with Bonds, and I would think Bonds would have hated him if he really was a racist. (And rightly so.) It was a stupid remark, but I'm not sure it's evidence that Clark is a racist."

Greg L. responded, "The reports at the time were that Bonds and Clark did not like each other. Clark and Hac-Man didn't much care for each other either. Only two black guys on the team I ever remember him being reported having problems with, but I think it was probably more of a team status thing than anything else."

As much as I loved Jeffrey Leonard as a player (I named my oldest son after him, even though he had left the team by then), I would have to agree with Greg's observation about him. Leonard never wanted anyone to encroach on his perceived leadership position. And, let's face it, Bonds is a prickly person and apparently wasn't much liked by any of the old-timers like Robby Thompson and Matt Williams when he got here. I think I remember that Clark also had problems with Chris Brown (Gregg was thinking Clark insulted Brown's nephew), but in the end, who's to say that Chris Brown wasn't the problem with everything else that went on with him?

Gregg mused, "I don't suppose we're ever really gonna find out any of this stuff, you know? I mean, wouldn't you love to ask some Giants guys, 'So, what's the deal? Is Bonds a jerk, or is that all media stuff? What about Clark? And Hac-Man? And was Chris Brown really a putz? Was Mitch a thug? Is Danny Darwin a big doodyhead?' I think you'd get widely differing answers."

When it comes to Darwin, I would probably vote for doodyhead. But you just know we won't ever get the scoop on this stuff, because nobody is ever going to dig that deeply. It's too easy for the local media to just latch on to the easy stereotypical targets (as in the aforementioned B. Bonds), and who else is ever even going to bother asking?

Getting back to Will, one big irony of his going to the Orioles is that he replaced Rafael Palmeiro at first, who he had previously pushed out of Texas five years earlier when he first signed with the Rangers. The punch line? Clark was forced out of Texas this year when the Rangers resigned Palmeiro. Apparently there was no love lost between the two players back in 1994, as Billy noted: "Fastball, in its Ranger coverage, is repeating some shit Palmeiro talked about Clark back in '93 ('No class, he undercut me, friendship means nothing,' etc.). Some pretty strong stuff, which I never saw when it was first said. Sheesh, you hate to see that happen, to say nothing of Fastball's choice of reprinting it five years later. I like both of those guys, and hopefully all this has been somewhat patched up, at least."

I would like to think so; why would Rafael Palmeiro even care about Will Clark at this point? Certainly the years have treated him better than they have treated Will.

Gregg said "I have to think, though, that the Rangers' re-signing of Palmeiro is an acknowledgment of a mistake made five years ago."

Julie countered "And, among other things, the Giants re-signing Will could be an acknowledgment of a mistake they made a few years ago."

Brian P. disagreed. "But it wasn't a mistake. As the years have shown, Will wasn't worth the money he got. He's been injured too often and his production has been fairly low for a 1B. It was a good decision by the Giants not to compete for his services at the $ level he was seeking (and got)."

To Gregg's observation that "At the same time, though, the Giants have only had one year of worthwhile production from a first baseman since Clark left," Brian countered, "But then, we could have improved on what we ended up with in a whole lot of ways. I'm not defending subsequent decisions about first base, just the decision to let Will go. I'll agree that in this case two wrongs certainly didn't make a right. Even one right didn't make a right."

One last note about the idea of signing Clark. Steven R. chimed in about Billy's suggestion that Clark might be "realistic" about the contract he was asking for. "Why would he be somewhat realistic? Given the going prices for the Mo Vaughns and the Rafael Palmeiros, Will Clark will be getting a lot bigger contract than he is worth. Signing him would be a mistake, no matter if he's better than Snow.

"I am one of J.T. Snow's biggest detractors, but one year of J.T. at $3 million is probably more intelligent than a buncha years at a gazillion dollars for Mo Vaughn. We might have a mediocre first baseman, but we no longer have the first baseman with the stupidest contract."

One thing I probably never expected to see from Steven was a positive word about J.T. Snow. Even a lukewarm one like this.

Gregg responded "Depends. If I were Al Rosen, the answer might be 'Willie McGee.'" "Naaah...,"parried Jesse, "it's all about my boy Buddy Black..."

Anson ignored all of this and provided data on the big free agent signings to that point, with the money figures representing millions of dollars:

Player       Total  Years  Per Year
Piazza:       $91     7     $13
Johnson:      $52.4   4     $13.1
Vaughn:       $80     6     $13.3
Williams:     $87.5   7     $12.5
Belle:        $65     5     $13

"Their average salaries are much closer than I expected, but of course the length of contracts matters too. Judging from the trend I'd guess that Brown's gonna get right around $13 million a year also, for six or seven years."

Well, I generally don't care what Brown makes, as long as he makes it as far away from the NL West as possible. The NL East would be okay. The AL would be better. The Japanese leagues would be fabulous, if something could be worked out. Let him torment the Tokyo Giants for a few years. (Life being what it is, though, watch him end up with the Dodgers.)

Anyway, all of these big salaries have not gone unnoticed. Bud Selig, shaking off several seasons of rust, dust, and cobwebs, has suddenly decided that, as commissioner, something might not be quite right. As Jason quoted from an AP article: "Amidst concern about the latest escalation in salaries, baseball owners will hold a special meeting Thursday in Chicago.

"Commissioner Bud Selig intends to tell the teams the widening disparity among the sport's rich and poor is damaging the game. Latest estimates have the top earning club with $170 million in revenue this year and the bottom team taking in only $35 million."

Bet the Brewers are way closer to the latter number than the former. It has always amazed me that, during the time when Acting-Commissioner Bud was being a caddy for all of the big spenders in the ownership ranks, he could never see what was happening to his own team. I guess getting rid of the work "Acting" from his title has really cleared up his eyesight.

"'We have a myriad of subjects to discuss,' Selig said Wednesday. 'Certainly the disparity question is a primary one. I wanted to have a meeting before that January meeting. That's why we're gathering.'"

Of course, the article doesn't mention the extra special meeting they are going to have on Tuesday to get ready for the meeting on Thursday. I heard Jerry Reinsdorf is unhappy about the menu selections planned for the New York meeting and wants to make his move before everyone else shows up.

"Anaheim, Arizona, Atlanta, Baltimore, the New York Mets and the New York Yankees all have signed players to deals worth $40 million or more, with the Mets giving Mike Piazza $91 million over seven years, the Yankees giving Bernie Williams $87.5 million over seven seasons and the Angels giving Mo Vaughn $80 million over six years."

You know, I am liking the Ellis Burks re-signing (two years, $10 million) more and more as this offseason has gone on.

"Top baseball officials, speaking on the condition they not be identified, already have concluded 15-18 of the 30 teams have been eliminated from contention for the eight playoffs spots next season -- simply because they can't generate enough revenue to field a lineup to compete with the big boys."

This is more than horrifying. It is sad. "Top baseball officials" already believe over 50 percent of the teams in the league won't compete. Whether it is true or not (and our friend Jonathan makes a good argument that it at least need not be true), the fact that these "baseball officials" think this and yet really have no plan to deal with it other than running on endlessly at yet another meeting calls to mind the vision of Nero fiddling while Rome is burning (and while that episode was probably myth, this one is all too real).

"Selig says he will steer clear of anything that approaches collusion. When commissioner Peter Ueberroth preached 'fiscal responsibility' in the mid-1980s, teams stopped signing free agents, resulting in arbitrators finding the clubs violated the anti-collusion provision of their labor agreement. The case eventually was settled for $280 million, and the current labor agreement has a provision for triple damages."

Which $280 million the owners spilt evenly, as I recall, so that George Steinbrenner, the blowhard who did more than anyone else to create the need for collusion in the first place, paid the same amount as the very strapped-for-cash Giants ownership.

"'I have said, and I will say it again, I know what I can do and I'm also acutely aware of what I can't do,' Selig said."

In other words, Bud knows he can't walk and chew gum at the same time, in no small part because he is very attuned to the results of trial and error.

"'Anything that will be done will be well thought out and within what legally we can do.'

"Union head Donald Fehr said he didn't have collusion concerns at this point. 'It would violate not only the letter but the spirit of the agreement if anything that happened at this meeting in any way affected the individual nature of club decision-making with respect to free agent players,' he said. 'I have been assured that it won't, and I'm prepared to take that assurance at face value unless or until elements suggest otherwise.'"

Donald's pasty face is lighting up, his runny eyes are getting big and he is foaming at the mouth. I'm sure he smells another $280 million just around the corner. Man, both sides of the long running baseball labor soap opera really disgust me (in case you couldn't tell from the gentle editorial insertions above).

Billy's reaction to the whole thing was "Selig is pissed off because all these high salaries will be used as evidence by the union that the sky is not falling, the next time the owners pull their usual CBA renegotiation crap."

Which the owners will lose, same as always.

"By the way, your team is not one of the small markets anyway."

Oh Billy, how can you say that? It sure feels like the Giants are.

Jason noted "There is an official definition of market size that takes into account media outlets, population, etc., and the San Francisco Bay Area is the fourth or fifth largest market, and the A's and Giants both play in this market."

Billy: "Well... then it's not really a small market, is it?"

Jason: "The market per capita team is the smallest. (Look I made up a new unit!)"

I think I might see a Nobel prize for Baseball Economics in your future, lad. Certainly, Bud Selig is not making a strong grab for it.

Well, it turned out to be $1.5 million, but now Billy was on a roll and who were we to stop him?

"So, anyone willing to give up some kind of piece-of-shit relief pitcher for Ryan Klesko? Because I'll bet that's next on the agenda. Hell, send us Tavarez and platoon Klesko with Snow, then at least we'd be getting someone with a pulse as opposed to Todd Jones, which is probably what's going to happen. Or Jeff Montgomery. Or John Franco. Or some other loser whose last good year was 1990.

"EEEEEEEEEE..." [many, many E's snipped here] "...EEEEEE!"

Amidst a relative lack of sympathy from Giants newsgroup regulars, the newsgroup lawyers were quick to leap into action.

Brian noted "Ooh. Copyright infringement. ('Oh please' is taken too)."

Anson was more formal in his warning. "Hey buddy, this letter 'E' is copyrighted material solely for the use and enjoyment of the San Francisco Giants baseball fans, and cannot be copied or distributed without the written consent of the Giants newsgroup." (Anson also told Billy in the same post that the Braves were lucky to have gotten Nixon, which may not have been the easiest of pills for Billy to swallow.)

Gregg interjected plaintively "Hey, I feel I should get the right of first refusal or something...."

Sorry Gregg. If you don't protect your trademarks, they revert into the public (or in this case alt.sports.baseball.sf-giants) domain.

In any event, Gregg has long been looking for a method to fund his dream of turning EEEEEE!into a multimedia empire, and this looked to be his chance to land some seed capital. "Well,' he noted "I'm big-time short on cash, so though I have not the slightest legal leg to stand on, I wonder if Billy would take it personally if I sued his ass. I'd start big, but settle for $25,000 after the legal fees. Would that work?"

Anson scented his own potential payday. "Well, I can be your agent. I only want a small cut, none of that 10-15% robbing like other agents. How about just 4% of that 25 grand?" And Dan M. also popped out of the woodwork, stating "I offer to be your expert witness (witless?). A mere 2%."

Billy had the last (and saddest) word on this subject: "After this joke of an offseason, I'd be more than willing to pay a royalty...."

Somehow, that seems a little too much like kicking someone when he is down. Unless Gregg landing the $25K means he is going to start paying for the articles we submit, in which case I say kick away.

This is good news, I think because (1) it keeps the team close to the parent club, which makes call-ups easier to facilitate, and (2) it gives me something else to do when I visit Fresno in the summer. I went to one Grizzlies game last year and quite enjoyed it. Fresno being Fresno, though, nothing ever happens until a lot of money changes hands, often several times in multiple directions. Plus, the Giants' franchise as w hole has a long history of baseball stadiums being a bitch to build. I will believe this new stadium has happened when I actually get to plant my behind in one of its seats.

Kind of how I feel about Pac Bell Park, come to think of it.

Ethan, as part of a "Partnership For An Accident-Free Rueter's Birthday 1998," lectured: "Rueter's Birthday is always one of the year's most exciting holidays. But every year, there are too many accidents that happen when people try to drink and drive. I would just like to remind everybody to be responsible when you drink, this December 1. Always have a designated driver, and don't forget to buckle up!

"Here's hoping you and your family have a happy, safe Rueter's Birthday."

Yeah, right, I thought. You can't pull one over on me that easily. I looked on a calendar and didn't see anything about Rueter's Birthday. But then Edith chimed in with "Here's the text of the 'Rueterday' card I got from my dad... I thought some of you might not know the words to the song: "'Dear Edith,

"'Sorry you were not here for the Rueter's Birthday sing-along this evening (you know how early those carolers have to go to bed on Rueterday). It was a moving pageant, little kids wearing ears that their mothers had knitted for them, mothers and fathers praising the left arms of their children, and the singing of the traditional anthem, 'Rueter Bells' (Rueter Bells, Rueter Bells/ Sling the ball away/ Oh what fun it is to see/ Our big-eared fellow play -- Hey!)'"

Wait, that's not 5-7-5... oh, sorry.

Anyway, I stand firmly corrected. December 1 is Rueterday, and will remain so as long as he is with the San Francisco Giants (as soon as he leaves, the holiday is out on its ass).

So, it seems only right to close with a cute little story about the birthday boy from Jesse. "You know, I was at a ball game this year, and this one kid yelled at Rueter: 'Hey, monkey-boy! Can I have a ball? Look! I'm a monkey-boy, too!'

"Yes, he did have similar funny ears; and yes, he did get a ball."

So that's what I've been doing wrong. And here I been thinking they would all relate when I pointed out how similarly our hairlines were receding.

Copyright ©1998 by Richard Booroojian

Back to the EEEEEE! Home Page