Welcome Guest Blogger and Author of, "Faking It", Elisa Lorello!

Thanks, Vicki, for hosting me on your blog! Readers should know that Vicki and I met on Facebook through a mutual dear friend of ours. She heard about my novel from him, read and enjoyed it, and has been incredibly supportive ever since. You can buy a print or download version of FAKING IT at Lulu.com, and it’s also available at Amazon. You can also follow me on Twitter@elisalorello, my blog “I’ll Have What She’s Having", or on Facebook at the Faking It Fans fan page.

If you’re looking for a fun summer read, then FAKING IT is definitely the book for you! Andi, a 30-something writing professor from New York, meets Devin, a handsome, charming escort, at a cocktail party and proposes an unusual arrangement: lessons in writing in exchange for lessons in how to be a better lover. However, when the two break the rules of their contract that forbids them from seeing each other socially and become friends, complications ensue. One of those complications, of course, is that Andi likes Devin as more than a friend. The tutorials take place mostly in Devin’s Manhattan loft during the summer months, and it gets steamy at times!

If you like When Harry Met Sally or Sex and the City, then FAKING IT is for you.

My favorite aspect of FAKING IT is the chemistry between Andi and Devin. As a writer, I’m very drawn to characters that have chemistry, be it romantic or platonic or some other form, and draw heavily on film and television character pairings for inspiration. And it doesn’t always have to be male-female. Matt and Danny on Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip had great chemistry. So did Leo and President Bartlet on The West Wing, or Lorelai and Rory on Gilmore Girls. Then, of course, there’s Harry and Sally, the couple that most inspired me, or Tom Hanks’ and Meg Ryan’s characters in You’ve Got Mail, which developed through dialogue, and shows that chemistry isn’t only the result of physical attraction. Much of Andi and Devin’s chemistry is found in their conversation. They constantly call each other out on the carpet in ways that others won’t, despite the fact that they’re both hiding quite a bit from each other.

I’d like to know your favorite character couplings – in print or on screen – and why you love them so much. Is it Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy? Carrie and Mr. Big? Abbott and Costello? What makes their chemistry so electric? What makes them work (or not work)? Please leave a comment and share with us!

Is There a Doctor in the Hamptons?

I recently watched the season premiere of "Royal Pains" on the USA Network, as I admittedly have something of a Mark Feuerstein crush, and given my love of the former NBC hit drama, "The West Wing", I feel the need to support any actor whom ever appeared on that show. (For those keeping track at home, Feuerstein played Cliff Caley, in a recurring guest-starring role.)

The show was, of course, entertaining, well-acted, well-written, clever, all anyone can ask of a new television show, in a time in which the pains of reality television seem to still be taking over. It did, however, raise the question for me, of "concierge doctors", and whether or not such a thing really does exist, and to what extent. Do the glitterati in places like the Hamptons, Manhattan, Aspen, Los Angeles, Telluride, Miami, et al., really have concierge doctors? Medical professionals who don't work for a hospital or medical practice, but rather work privately, for the world's elite, allowing them to avoid documented medical care (and, potential public embarrasment and/or police action) for plastic surgeries gone awry and drug overdoses? Doctors who pull up in a fancy SVU with a myriad of portable medical devices in the back? A black, leather Coach bag containing perscriptions? (And, how many medical ethics are being violated by physicians randomly carrying a variety of perscriptions, and potentially carrying them over state lines.)

Perhaps it's my own ignorance or naivety on the subject, as I am not one of the world's elite, possessed with the luxury of a private physician. Now, I will admit that in this day HMO's, increasing difficulty to obtain services as insurance companies don't want to pay, and the never-ending pleasure of waiting for hours in a hosptial emergency room, for a broken bone or laceration, the idea of having a conceirge doctor isn't an altogether unpleasant idea. But, shouldn't affordable and quality healthcare be a basic right of all people, regardless of station in life? Shouldn't the person who takes out Donald Trump's garbage be entitled to the same medical care as The Donald, himself? This isn't the same thing as buying a Wii or an iPhone, it's healthcare. Doesn't healthcare fall under the three unalienable rights that are provided to all citizens of this country, life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness? Isn't that precisely why there are valid arguments for universal healthcare in this country, and why it's really only going to be a matter of time before it becomes a reality? Is this just going to be one more thing, one more wedge-issue to continue to divide the have's and have not's in America, yet another thing to cause contention between the classes?

And, should we be questioning the ethics of doctors who do become concierge doctors? The physician who went from being the Chief of Internal Medicine at the Mayo Clinic or Mount Sinai, and who now pumps the stomach of some Hollywood starlet who is vacationing in the Hamptons, so that it doesn't end up on "Entertainment Tonight", when she is taken to the hospital. (Let's be honest, the people who have the resources to hire doctors on demand aren't hiring the general practioner from some little family practice in Lancaster, Pennsylvania.) Does it only feed into the idea that has been perpetuated by society, the media, and certain aspects of the medical community, that people only become doctors because they want to be rich? (Now, obviously, anyone who has a friend or family member that is a doctor, knows that hardly all physicians end up rolling in dough, too. As with any profession, a great deal depends on location and specialty. The pediatrician or emergency room physician at a local, community hospital isn't making anywhere near what that plastic surgeon in New York City or the cardiothorasic surgeon in Boston are making.) I don't doubt that many doctors out there would love to find a way to pay off their student loans, faster, but wouldn't any reasonable physician have some serious moral or ethical objections to this type of practice? Shouldn't it, in some way, be a violation of the Hippocratic Oath?

Now, Feurestein's character on "Royal Pains" is certainly an example of a concierge doctor with a conscience, who genuinely cares more for the patients he is called in to see, rather than what he is being paid from someone's black American Express card. Should concierge doctors really be as prevelant as they seem, based on the portrayal, we can only hope that they have the same moral fiber possessed by Feurestein's character. And, for those of us who have or will watch, "Royal Pains", we can only hope that continues to the enduring and endearing trait of the character, and that he doesn't turn into what I'm sure we all imagine is the stereotypical concierge doctor in the Hamptons.

On the Prowl

There definately seems to be an increasing interest in the older woman-young man relationship, as of late. While some actresses like Susan Sarandon and Goldie Hawn have been with their younger men (Tim Robbins and Kurt Russell, respectively), have Madonna and Demi Moore made it even more acceptable? Desirable, even.

Between the new reality show, "The Cougar" and new Courteney Cox sitcom, to debut in the fall, "Cougar Town", (and, just simple fact that a term, "cougar" was even coined, a few years ago, for women who date younger men), it's something that is being talked about and even examined more and more. Have we finally come to a point in our society in which is just as socially acceptable for a woman to date a younger man, as it is for an older man to date a younger woman? And, if so, what took us long to get here? Or, is that there is still something that seems rather illicit about the older woman-younger man relationship that has everyone tuning into a yet another reality show in which people voluntarily humiliate themselves, or network executives debuting new shows regarding the topic? And, how do the women who may be, by some, called cougars feel about it? How do they feel about the increased interest in, or attention to their dating and sex lives? How do they feel about the term, "cougar"? (CNN did a story on this topic a few weeks ago, in which many women were voicing their distain for the term, and felt that if a label needed to be attached to a woman who dates younger men, then they would prefer the word, "sophisiticat". Still in keeping with the feline imagery, apparently.)

As someone who did recently have a relationship with a younger guy (and, I'm playing it fast and loose with the word, "relationship"), there are aspects of it that were fun and appealing and aspects that weren't. (Allow me to preface by saying that unlike the Courteney Cox character in the upcoming ABC sitcom, "Cougar Town", or the woman who is allowing herself to be objectified on national television for her 15 minutes of fame, on "The Cougar", I am not in my 40's, typically the age range associated with woman who are called cougars...I'm 31 and the guy I had dated was 24.) He's a great guy, and we certainly had a lot of fun together, during the time in which we did date. But, it was definately hard for me to get serious about a guy who was still getting started in his life, while I am at a point of wanting to settle down and have a family. (Perhaps that is why "cougars" tend to be a bit older...the women who have already been married and had children and are now embarking on a new chapter of their lives?) And, it certainly didn't help that he was working as a bartender to pay his way through school, so he worked primarily evenings and weekends, while I work a Monday through Friday, 9 to 5-type of job. (He was so kind as to call me, intoxicated, at 3:00 in the morning, after the Super Bowl. The Super Bow being on a Sunday of course, meant that I was supposed to be waking up about 3 hours later, to workout, shower, eat breakfast, et al, before work. You can imagine my joy.) Do these relationships work better, when the women is perhaps in her 40's and has already done the marriage and kids-thing? (Or, at a point in her life where, even if she hasn't had those things, she wasn't looking for them in the first place, or perfectly content not having them?) Do they work better if the man and woman at least have more similar work schedules, as to prohibit one of them from being awoken in the middle of the night, for a booty call, on a work night, when the alarm is set to go off in just a couple of hours?

What is the increased interest within our society, as of late, regarding this relationship dynamic? Why was it so socially acceptable for Sarandon and Hawn for years (nobody ever seemed to question their relationships with their younger partners), both of whom have been with their significant others for longer periods of time than most other Hollywood couples, while most other women had (and, still do, to a certain degree) snide comments made about them? Are these women trying to recapture their youth, the things they may have missed out on, while they were focusing on their careers, or their marriages, or raising their children? Is the term, "cougar" offensive to a lot of women? What makes the older woman-younger man relationship work, what makes it successful? (Or is it necessarily supposed to be successful, long-term?)

I, for one, applaud women who are comfortable with themselves and their sexuality. And, if you're in your 40's and 20-somethings are finding you attractive and desirable, then you know what? You must be doing something right.

Loving "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit"

Like many people, I love the show, "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit", and watching with eagerness and glee on Tuesday night, as they aired the season finale.

I can't begin to express how happy I am that NBC didn't end the season with a cliffhanger episode, making viewers spend their summer, waiting in anxious anticipation for the new season to begin in the fall. Additionally, like most people, I am grateful that no one was taking my blood pressure, while watching the show. I think it's fair to say that Tuesday night's episode was one of the best of the show. (And, that's saying a lot, as every show is well-written, well-acted, and full of suspense and twists.) For those who watch the show, I think we all knew it was a matter of time before the character of Dale Stuckey was bid adieu, given the irritating nature of the character. But, as I'm sure many people were, I wouldn't have guessed, a few episodes ago, that he was going to go out in the manner in which he did. (I guess being bullied really can cause some people to snap!)

The main reason I was concerned, as I'm sure others were, that NBC would end the season with a cliffhanger episode is due to the fact that at last word, neither Christopher Meloni (aka Detective Elliot Stabler) or Mariska Hargitay (aka Detective Olivia Benson) had signed their contracts for next season, and were still in negotiations. Which leads me to ponder....how would it affect the show, should one or both of those actors chose to leave? Would it affect the ratings? Would people stop watching, given that a great many people feel that Meloni and Hargitay's characters, and their chemisty is a large part of the popularity? (While the ratings may not have been affected after the departure of Stephanie March, who plays ADA Alexandra Cabot, a lot of viewers were sad to see her leave, hopeful that she would return, expressing disdain for the other actresses who stepped into the role of the Special Victims Unit ADA, and very happy to see her return earlier this season, while remaining concerned that it my only be short-term, as she continues to appear in the credits as a "special guest star" as opposed to her name and photo appearing in the opening theme song sequence, along with Meloni, Hargitay, B.D. Wong, Dan Florek, Tamara Tunie, Ice-T, and Richard Belzer.) Would the overall chemisty and dynamic of the show be adversely affected should either (or both) Meloni or Hargitay chose not to sign a new contract? Or, would the show continue, essentially unaffected, demonstrating that it's more about the writing, the story lines, the direction, and the overall ensemble, rather than one or two characters? (Many a critic and viewer thought it was going to be the end of "ER", after Anthony Edwards left the show, especially since George Clooney, Sherry Stringfield, Julianna Marguiles and a few others had already left the show by that point, too. But, the show continued on, even with a seeming revolving door of cast members, for several more years, not calling, "wrap", until earlier this season.) Besides, hasn't the orignal, "Law and Order" been on the air, for something like 15 years? And, none of the current cast members have been with the show, since the beginning, not even Sam Waterston.

All of the primary characters on "Law and Order: Special Victims Unit" are enjoyable to watch and brought to life by talented actors, and it would certainly feel strange to watch the show, should any of them permenately. (Again, people never warmed to the other actresses who portrayed the ADA, the way they did Stephanie March.) Who could preside over the squad better then Dan Florek as Captain Cregan? What would it be like to not see the smart street sense of Ice-T as Finn Tutuola, paired with the paranoid, conspiracy theorist of Richard Belzer's John Munch. Who could give the FBI profiles prospective better than B.D. Wong as Dr. Georg Huang, and would we really want to see any other medical examiner speaking for the victim, other than Tamara Tunie as Dr. Melinda Warner? But, somehow, it still seems to come back around to Meloni and Hargitay as Stabler and Benson, respectively. How would the departure of one or both of these actors affect the show?

Of course, we have summer for these actors to renew their contracts. And, the possibility of the Screen Actors Guild going on strike again, too, could make it something of a moot point, for awhile, too.

Words Can Hurt, Too

As someone who used to work in the field of domestic violence and sexual assault, perhaps I have stronger radar as it pertains to healthy relationships and anger management and communication skills. But, I continue to be concerned by the number of women who find themselves in abusive relationships and don't realize it. Why don't they realize it? Because the abuse isn't coming in the form of physical or sexual abuse, it's coming in the form of verbal abuse. And, it seems that a great many people continue to either deny or at least not see, that verbal abuse is every bit as damaging as physical abuse. No one (or at least no one with a social conscious) would stand by and allow a parent to hurl expletives and hurtful statements at a child, so why do some of these same people not see that it's not different just because the husband or boyfriend is yelling degrading and derogatory statements towards a wife or girlfriend? Is it because adults should have the "equipment" to defend themselves, or fight back? Or is it that verbal abuse is still not widely acknowledged or understood, since it doesn't leave physical bruises or scars? (With that said, to paraphrase a former Supreme Court Justice, I may not be able to define verbal abuse, but I know it when I see it.) Do the women (and, men...women can be perpetrators of abuse and violence, too) think that they egged the person on, got them angry and riled up? Do they say, "but, he doesn't hit me...I'm not being abused", or do they just feel they deserve it.

Sadly, it's probably, more often than not, the last one. Boys who grow up in abusive households are three times more likely to become perpetrators themselves, while girls are much more likely to end up in abusive relationships, themselves. Boys see dad being abusive and girls see mom being abused.

The fact remains, however, that no matter what you may have done, being late for dinner, not being in the mood for sex, forgetting to record a tv show, no one has the right to make you feel as though you are less than you are. And, it continues to be of concern to me, when I even see friends of mine, women who are, in every other respect, strong, capable, forthright women, in relationships in which they are not being treated well...not treated well to the point of verbal and emotional abuse. (Note: if your boyfriend or husband wants to know where you are every second of the day, if he expects you to report to him by a certain point in the evening, if he expects an explanation as to why you didn't answer the phone when he called, it's not because he loves you and is concerned about you, it's because he's trying to control you. And, that's not live, sista.)

Does he call you names? Refer you to, using language that is demeaning? Does he limit your ability to communicate, openly, with friends and family? Does he embarras or humiliate you in public? Does he make you feel like you can't do anything right? Does he continually make fun of you? Does he expect to track your every move? Well, that's abusive behavior. And, the greatest concern is always that of it possibly escalating.

Women tend to be overwhelmed with these feelings of, "oh, but I know he can change." Can he? Of course he can. People can change, it happens all the time. Will he? Maybe. Maybe not. But, like everything else in life, people can only change when THEY want to, not because someone else wants them to. If HE realizes that his behavior is unacceptable, and is willing to go through the proper channels to address whatver his issues are (growing up in abusive household, issues of anger management, jealousy, trust, et al), then yes, it's promising. But, if that's not going to happen, then we can only hope that the women who find themselves in the position of being victimized by verbal and emotional abuse, find their inner strength to realize they deserve so much better, and that the world really is full of men who won't disrespect them.

And, for the men out there who do find themselves the perpetrators of abuse towards women, just remember...a woman brought you into this world, and another one can take you out.

Take This Job, And...Suck It Up?

How does one deal with job frustrations in a time of economic strife and country-wide layoffs? A time in which companies are going through hiring freezes and the cost of everything from health care to food is going up? Do you voice your concerns and frustrations to your supervisor, in the hopes of things improving? Or do you suck it up and just keep doing what you're doing, for fear that you will get fired, and won't be able to find another job, in a timely fashion? Would an employee fire someone, for voicing displeasure with their job, or the way in which the company handles things? Is it worth the cost of unemployment combined with the cost of posting job ad's, hiring and training a new employee? Or, is it worth letting go of a unhappy employee and hiring someone, whom yes, will need to be trained, but who has perhaps been out of work, for awhile, and therefore just so happy to have a job again that they will put with anything?

If you do choose to voice your concerns or displeasure with an employer in the current job market, should you, just to err on the side of caution, have already started looking for another job, should you at least have some irons in the fire? Do potential job seekers need to be more open to the possibility of picking up and moving, to another part of the country where they may be more opportunities, rather than limiting themselves to only looking in the area in which they currently reside? And, if married, how does that possibility affect the spouse and the career prospects? (The world is full of people who don't want to move for a different job opportunity, because they don't want to uproot their kids, have them change schools, etc. But, as an Army Brat myself, I have never had much understanding or sympathy for that line of thinking...kids adjust far easier than adults do, and there is a lot to be said for the educational and sociological experiences that come with not living in the same place for ones entire life. You go where the work is. And, in the long run, which is worse for the child, moving to a place, or seeing their parents depressed, out of work, and struggling financially?)

I am seeing, more and more, people who are frustrated in their current jobs. Frustrated, because of budget cuts, restructuring and hiring freezes, they are faced with the inability to do much to grow, or receive much support in their efforts towards professional development. And, the frustration is only increased by the fear that they are not in a position to speak out, given concern of being laid-off. (Even if a company doesn't fire you for voicing displeasure, the threat of future lay-offs always seems to be looming.)

What can companies do to ensure that their employees are remaining satisfied in their jobs, ensuring that they don't choose to look for other jobs, once the economy and job market improves? Will there be an onslaught, once things to pick up again, of people resigning from their jobs, to look for better opportunities, after months or even years of feeling dissatisfied and unappreciated? While companies, both for profit and nonprofits are being forced, more and more, to demonstrate their transparency with the general public, could they be doing a better job of demonstrating it to their employees, giving a better understanding of where the company is and where it's headed?

Both employers and employees seem to be dancing on the edge of a knife. No one, in the current state of financial affairs, can really afford to be out of work, but can employers really run the risk of being further short-staffed, should employees resign, given the number of lay-offs and hiring freezes that have, or are, currently, taking place? How can both parties be satisfied, fulfilled, and productive? Because, there is a big difference between a job and a career, and most people want careers. But, it seems, more and more that even those who are in their careers are feeling as though it's just a job, but stuck to do much about it. And, which is more beneficial to an employer...someone who feels that they're being treated fairly and given opportunity to grow, professionally, someone who is satisfied, or someone who feels that they have no idea what is going on from one day to the next, within the company for which they work, feeling as though they're walking on eggshells, and feeling infuriated when they see the bonuses that were paid to the CEO and COO, on the companies tax returns?

It seems that honesty may be the best policy on both fronts...the employee needs to be honest about how their feeling, their career goals, et al, the employer needs to be honest with the employees, regarding finances and the track that the company is on. And, both need to be able to feel as though they can do without fear of retribution. And, that's the rub, it seems....

Pondering "The Philanthropist"

NBC will be debuting a new on June 24th, 2009, "The Philanthropist".

I must admit that as an overall fan of NBC programming and someone who has worked, in some capacity, within the nonprofit sector, for several years, I am quite curious and definately like the title, and what it stands for. The ad's that I have seen on television, thus far, along with the few bits and pieces of information which I have read, do cause me to raise my eyebrows, though, at the premise. A young billionaire, while on vacation, loses his son, the result of which is that he has a newfound respect and appreciation for someone in his position of wealth, being charitable and philanthropic. Ahhh....but, of course that's not enough of a pitch to sell the Armani-wearing big wigs in Hollywood, is it? Of course not...the twist being that instead of building hospital wings, or funding new programs at local nonprofits, instead of attending $2,000.00 a plate fundraising dinners to raise money to send medical supplies to third world countries, he is doing the travelling, himself to the third world country, to deliver the supplies. Okaaaaaaayyyyyyy....So, I'm guessing that he finds himself in some rather dangerous (read: exciting for the viewer) situations, all in the name of charitable giving.

While I do applaud NBC for examing the need for philanthropy and think it's an interesting premise, what is wrong with a slightly more realistic approach to a television show that revolves around a wealthy giver? Based on the ad's that I have seen, and the few things that I have read, it seems that the show will put our young, wealthy, philanthropist in a lot of third world countries. Now, that is all well and good, and certainly there are many countries all over the world who desperately need the services provided by American npo's and ngo's. But, I'm curious if there will ever be any episodes revolving around the local domestic violence shelter or Humane Society? I have worked for small, locally-based nonprofits, and those are people who are giving their all, every day, in the trenches, working for the greater good, to improve their communities. Those types of episodes may not make for exciting television, the way being stranded in Korean refuge camp would, but they're every bit as socially concious. And, would hopefully demonstrate the importance of giving back to your local community, while also giving back to your global community.

Technorati

Technorati Profile

Coming Soon....Guest Blogger Elisa Lorello!

On June 9th, my friend Elisa Lorello will be a guest blogger, here in my blogspot blog, to promote her novel, "Faking it". I read the couple a couple of months ago, and thoroughly enjoyed it, so I sincerely hope her upcoming blog tour will be hugely successful in continuing to get the word out! So, tune in on June 9th, for my friend and guest blogger, Elisa Lorello!

Wall Street is NOT a Nonprofit

As someone who works in the nonprofit sector, and as someone who is, you know...HUMAN, I find this infuriating....

http://philanthropy.com/news/philanthropytoday/8438/aig-seeks-control-of-charitable-endowment

Just because the banking industry can't seem to turn a profit doesn't make it a nonprofit.

Perhaps I am just cold hearted, after years of dedicating my life to the nonprofit sector, but my heart is not breaking for the crooked, Wall Street fat cats, who are not getting their annual bonuses. Their annual bonuses being far greater than what most people annual salaries are.

I would hope that the recent trials of Wall Street (both literal and figurative) have taught us all about the need for transparency. In every sector, public, private, governmental, et al. And, as such, I can't believe that the powers that be at AIG, would honestly think that they could get away with dipping into their charitable endowment to pay bonuses to certain employees. Given the current economic climate and the fact that there is a greater need for services that are provided to people by both the nonprofit sector and the government, I can't think of a better time to use a corporate charitable endowment the way it was MEANT to be used. By helping those less fortunate. And, regardless of the economic hardships currently being faced by Wall Street, there are a great many people who are far less fortunate than those investors who may not be getting their bonuses. You know, like the people who had invested with them.

Oh, and it may be worth mentioning that it's illegal to do what AIG is attempting. Not like that has ever stopped them before, though. Obviously....right, Mr. Madoff?

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyl and Mr. Cheney

Who is this person who is now in favor of same-sex marriage, states that there was no connection between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 and isn't commenting on Sonia Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court and what have they done with our former Vice Idiot, Dick Cheney? When did Dick Cheney, become...almost...human?? (Bear in mind, I said, "almost".) I must say that it's rather disconcerting to see someone to whom I never failed to hurl anger and annoyance, acting like a rational, reasonable human being. Has he come to his senses, that he is no longer having to deal with the Village Idiot of Texas? Has he realized, out in the light of day, away from the confines of the Vice President's Mansion, that perhaps he should be a little more accepting of his daughter's orientation? Is this guy, Mr.-I-Shoot-My-Friends-In-The-Face, going to come out in favor of stricter gun control? And, he didn't feel to speak out on the fact that there was no connection between Saddam Husseing and 9/11, oh....I don't know...say...BEFORE WE STARTED FIGHTING TWO WARS? Did he just feel that little piece of information wasn't important until recently? For that alone, he, along with his cohorts GW Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, and Condoleeza Rice, should be dragged off to the Hague and tried for war crimes.

I really thought one of the benefits (and, there should be many) of no longer having him as the VP would be that we wouldn't have to see him anymore. And, now I feel as though everytime I turn on the TV, there is his big, fat, war mongering, lying, anti-choice, anti-education, head on CNN, "The Today Show", "Meet the Press", "The Week", et al. I'm waiting, in horror, for him to host "Saturday Night Live" or turn in a guest-starring appearance on "How I Met Your Mother". (Although, I wouldn't be altogether opposed to him make a royal ass of himself, along with a bunch of other B-list celebrities, on "I'm a Celebrity, Get Me Out of Here". Maybe the producers can kill two birds with one stone and set the show in the Hague, actually..."I'm a Politician Who Committed Crimes Against Humanity, I Deserve To Be Here".

A lot of talking heads are making predictions of a Cheney run for the Presidency in 2012, which is perhaps why he seems to be changing his tune on a lot of issues. All I have to say is, "bring it on, Dick". Democrats don't typically like to engage in smear campaigns, but in your case...I think we'll make an exception.

Relaying Relay for Life

This past weekend was the Relay for Life event, to raise money for the American Cancer Society, here in Williamsburg, VA. The event was held at Jamestown High School.

While I have participated in many Relay for Life events in the past, this was my first year as a team captain. I named the team, "Billie's Belles", after my mother (whose name was Billie, obviously), who lost her own battle with breast cancer in May 2003. Overall, I have to say that I think we were pretty successful, considering it was my first year as a team captain. (And, I didn't form my team and start fundraising until pretty late. Plus, I gave a lot of energy to an MS Walk that I did for a friend of mine, in Hershey, PA.) We didn't meet our team goal, but I did surpass my personal fundraising goal. (And, the fundraising efforts aren't done yet! We still have until July 23rd to raise money...http://main.acsevents.org/goto/billiesbelles.)

In the grand scheme of things, I know I should just take pride in the job I did, my first time out, as a team captain, and be happy for the money we raised, for the American Cancer Society, while also being grateful for those who donated and/or came out to walk with me, in the event. But, I am still struggling with some feelings of disappointment. Disappointment in myself for not focusing on it more and devoting more time to it, disappointment in those people whom I really thought would have at least responded to my requests for donations and/or team members, with emotional support, "hey, I can't make it to the event, and money is really tight, but I just want you to know that I'll be thinking about you. Good luck!", and disappointment in feeling that I let my mom down, somehow, in not doing more.

Obviously, I am incredibly grateful to those wonderful friends who not only came out to walk with me, but even stayed with me all, night, for the full 12 hours. And, I am so touched and humbled by the number of people whom did donate, especially given the tough economic times in which we all find ourselves. But, there is still that nagging feeling that I didn't do enough, and I'm having a very hard time reconciling my feelings of disappointment not only in myself, but in others.

I'll be the first to acknowledge that we can't all do everything or give to everything...I certainly can't. But, I do at least try. Even if I can't attend the fundraiser, the sporting event, the show, et al, that a friend is involved with, even if I can't contribute financially, I do what I can to let them know that I'm proud of them and will be thinking about them. And, I'm finding it rather discouraging, knowing that I certainly do what I can to be there for people, to feel as though as I have been let down by certain people....especially when some of them are people whom have often counted on me to be there for them. Now, I am certainly pretty hard on myself....and, as such, perhaps I'm harder on others than I should be. But, with that said, I don't think I expect anything of others that I don't expect of myself.

I'm confident that whatever feelings of disappointment I'm currently feeling in both myself and others, is something that I will get over. I don't believe in holding grudges. I just wanted this to be a grand success, for my mom, who was a great woman, and someone whom I miss every day.

I supposed the important thing is to take all of this as a learning experience, for the future, for any other Relay for Life events (or Susan G. Komen) that I may head-up.

The Passion of the Gibson

So, I haven't been a big fan of Mel Gibson's for quite awhile....ever since I met him on the set of "We Were Soldiers" (my father was portrayed in the film), and found him to be something of well...an ass. In the years since then, he has only continued to be less-than-impressive, in my opinion. He refused to denounce his father's rather moronic comments regarding his belief that the Holocaust never happened, on the heels of making a rather anti-semitic film, he gets pulled over for a DUI, and in the process makes some just lovely (read: idiotic and racist) comments to the officers who pulled him over. And, now, after years of claiming what a devout Catholic he is and basically implying that anyone of a differing faith is a heretic, he is divorcing his wife of over 20 years and has proceeded to get his girlfriend pregnant. Now, I am certainly not one to listen to many of the ideas put forth, by many religions, regarding sex, birth control, et al. Nor am I one to knock others for their beliefs, whatever they may be. But, what I do have a problem with is hypocrisy. If Mel Gibson had kept his mouth shut about how devout he was, and always claiming to be such a good, observant Catholic (I know plenty of Catholics who use birth control and have premarital sex, but they also don't go around making other people feel as though they are less than they are), then I wouldn't care for a split second about the fact that he is getting a divorce, or impregnating his girlfriend, before his divorce is even finalized. But....he DID shoot his mouth off, therefore I'm allowed to pass judgement and call him a hypocrite.

And, the envelope of hypocrisy, racism, and overall assholic-ness goes to...Mel Gibson.

Word Play Consulting

So, I have begun to take some very small steps towards starting my own business...Word Play Consulting, which will be a professional writing service. (Grant writing, press releases, speeches, scripts, blog contributions, et al.) Given my fondness for the written word, combined with my background in nonprofit development work, in which I wrote grants, press releases, speeches, etc., and my current and increasing frustrations with my job, it seems like the right time to try to pursue this. I have bought the website domain (www.wordplayconsulting.com) and started looking at business cards and thinking of various marketing techniques. I have not yet started to build the website, as I am not even remotely savvy in that respect, so I am waiting for one of my IT wiz friends/coworkers, to return from a business trip. (At which point, we will hopefully sit down with another IT wiz friend of both of ours.) I also figure that given my desire to possibly move, this is something that I could do from where....just take it with me!

Like I said, this is all in the very preliminary stages right now. (I just purchased the website domain yesterday!) But, I am getting pretty excited about it. And, I figure that given my experience, in various capacities, within the nonprofit sector, I could also work as something of a nonprofit consultant, in addition to providing various writing services. (The latter wouldn't necessarily be limited to the nonprofit sector.)

So, should you or anyone whom you know, need any writing/editing done....you know who to call!

Rockin' Women

So, a friend of mine recently bought Rock Band 2, for the Wii. The reason being that Beatles Rock Band is coming out in September and his best friend as already pre-ordered it. In an attempt to make sure that we don't all suck, when the Beatles edition comes out, Rock Band 2 was purchased to ensure that we have time to practice, before September. (Yes, I am apparently, that much of a geek.) As we have gotten together recently, (at present time, it's usually two men and two women) it has occured to me that the vast majority of the songs that are available, are performed by men. There are only a handful, of the vast and varied songs on Rock Band 2, that are performed (at least, vocally) by women. Now, certainly, I appreciate that there are a greater number of male rockers than there are women and probably a larger number of men who play Rock Band, or even just have Wii's in general. (I, apparently, buck that stereotype.) But, wouldn't it stand to reason that if the ladies were given their due, then it might cause an increased interest among us estrogen-producing members of society, in playing such games as Rock Band??

So, let's consider this my grassroots campaign to develop an additional Rock Band game, or at the very least an additional song pack, that gives credit to the women who rock. Let us all bow down and pay homage to Melissa Etheridge, Sheryl Crow, Meredith Brooks, Chrissie Hynde, The Bangles, KD Lang, Alanis Morrisette, Saving Jane, Pat Benatar, Stevie Nicks, Heart, Tina Turner, Janis Joplin, Gwen Stefani, Lauryn Hill, The Indigo Girls, Christina Aguilara, Pink, Carole King, Carly Simon, Madonna, and all of the other women of rock!