I Heart Ricky

Ricky Gervais, that is. Ricky presided over the Golden Globes this year and did a very good job. There were no dancing numbers, no superfluous tributes, no fluff, none (the Oscars could take a cue from how these awards are run). I love Ricky Gervais and his cheeky humor and was bowled over by the ad preceding awards night.

And Ricky was funny--schilling his DVD's (The Office, The Invention of Lying), all while guzzling from a glass of beer (hidden on a shelf in the podium, right). "Hey, everyone else is out there [in the audience] getting drunk, why shouldn't I?", he retorted at one point, as he took an especially big gulp.

But I don't know if the HFPA or the censors or the producers had a tight rein on him, because it didn't seem like he completely let loose. Frankly, the pre-award ads were hysterical, so I guess my expectations were similarly raised. His banter was funny, but not bust-gustingly funny. Ricky's humor has an edge (kind of like a smarmy British cousin of Conan O'Brien), unlike, say, Craig Ferguson, who pokes more gentle fun at people. So I could see why the PTB would tell him to tone it down. And speaking of Ferguson, I think would be a terrific host for next year's GG. But, I digress, and would give Ricky a B for his hosting.

Among the highlights of the night:

Mo'Nique received the first award for Supporting Actress in Precious, thanking Director Lee Daniels and her husband, with whom they pledged to each other that they would become famous actors one day. She concluded with a nod to the movie and its dealing with emotional and physical abuse and said "This is for everyone who has been touched...now is the time to stand up and say something."

Meryl Streep, who won for Julie and Julia, thanked her mother (who died last year), who she noted was a "marvelous cook" and served, along with Child, as her inspiration for the role. She expressed her mixed emotions at going to an event that could be seen by many as frivolous. But Meryl said she felt sure her mother would have told her to "give [to Haiti] as much as you can, do whatever you can, and go to the show grateful for the opportunity."

Robert Downey, Jr. gave the best speech, starting with, "Well, I'll tell who I'm not going to thank for this award, and that's my wife Susan [who was also a producer on Sherlock Holmes]. She told me at 10 o'clock this morning that I had no chance of winning so I didn't have to worry about writing any speech." His "not thanking" turned serious and very heartfelt, particularly when talking, indirectly, with the people that stood by him during tough times.

In her speech, Sandra Bullock told her relatives to "put down the Maker's Mark and get to bed." Like Downey, Bullock's speech started funny, then turned serious when thanking her husband, Jesse James: "It's no surprise to me that my work has gotten better in the past few years, and that's because of you, and I have you to thank."

Most of the award recipients were predictable, but one that drew gasps was when The Hangover won for best Comedy or Musical, beating out Nine, Julie & Julia, It's Complicated, and (500) Days of Summer. I know those HFPA correspondents are a little offbeat and kooky, but this was a shocker to me.

The pre-show was marred by rain, which did not allow much star lingering on the red carpet. The venue, the Beverly Hills Hilton, made in my mind a major blunder by not covering the red carpet. People: you know that it's going to rain and using clumsy BHH umbrellas to try to protect people from the rain didn't cut it.

As for the fashion, I was underwhelmed. Underwhelmed! Watching the awards shows last year, I was bowled over by so many beautiful dresses, but at the GG there were more strike outs than home runs. But I'll start with the good:

Kate Hudson got a lot of flak for her choice, a long white gown with a sculptural quality, but I liked it. The ruffle at the bodice softened the look, and the gown fit her perfectly. Her choice of jewelry--a dangling pair of pearl and diamond earrings--was just enough. I don't know how she walked in her shoes--platformed stilletos--but Kate is a petite thing, and the shoes definitely gave her a longer line.


Reese Witherspoon was a no-show on the red carpet due to the inclement weather, but viewers got a peek at her dress when she presented. A bright jeweled blue with the asymmetrical/one shoulder design that was very popular that night, I thought she looked young and fresh, but she looked a little too thin.

Speaking of young and fresh, Heather Graham was both in a long, black sequined halter dress with a plunging neckline. With her hair sleekly pulled back and with subtle makeup, she looked like a dewy ingenue.

Another "new generation" that I thought got it right was Ginnifer Goodwin. She, like many women, chose a cocktail-length dress, hers in a vibrant purple. But unlike many other people, who looked too casual, Ginnifer's look was an excellent spin on updated formal. She also had the asymmetrical/one shoulder look, but because how the fabric was fashioned, it literally gave the dress a new twist.

Jennifer Gardner strengthened her reputation as a fashion maven by choosing this sparkly one shoulder gown with an interesting sequined pattern. It fit her very well and she was one of the few women who wore her hair down without the hair looking limp.

Mo'Nique was glowing throughout the night but I didn't get the long, draped gown in a satin gold. It looked too much like a pair of drapes (remember that old Carol Burnett sketch "I saw it in the window and I just had to have it"?).

Mariah Carey exercised poor choice and complete lack of decorum in her waaaaay-too-revealing (and waay too tight) dress. Lots of women did plunging necklines, but Mariah's dress showed too much and the fit was not flattering.

It was great to see Tea Leone and David Dukovny out and together as a couple, but Tea's outfit was a bit of a head scratcher. She looked more like a soccer mom with a blue oxford cloth shirt (David's, maybe?) and a necklace that looked like pop beads (her daughter's maybe?).

Also, sadly, not looking her best was Julia Roberts, in a very casual, short black dress wearing a strange, Mr. T-style necklace. Her hair had that tousled, just got out of bed look, that went with the dress--if she had been going out to dinner rather than an awards show.

And finally, Drew Barrymore, one of my favorites glowed throughout the evening. Her dress, made especially for her by Donatella Versace, was a beautiful nude-pink tone that perfectly complemented her skin tone. But sadly, the Versace gown had these objects attached to the shoulder and waist that kind of looked like glittery porcupines. I like the idea of something sparkly on this dress, but a vintage brooch pinned to the shoulder or waist would be a less prickly alternative.

Speaking of prickly, that's all the barbs from me. I'll revert back to more non-fashion current events until the Oscars next month.

Re: Your LinkedIn Request...

Don: What a surprise it was, hearing from you after 15 years -- and asking me if I want to be your LinkedIn "friend". I didn't realize Hell had frozen over...backspace, backspace, delete, delete.

Don: Want to be my LinkedIn friend? I'll tell you where to get LinkedIn my friend, right in the gutter where you slithered in from...erase, erase, erase.

Don: Wow - so you want to catch up and see how I'm doing? Wow, that's actually acting like a human. So unlike our last exchange, when you broke up with me on the phone - remember that ? Oh, and my personal favorite, that the only reason you dated me was because there was so much "cool stuff" going on in my neighborhood? Ring a bell? Well, my "friend", you can go fuc...backspace, erase, backspace, erase.

Don: Good thing you didn't show up at my door asking to be my friend and good thing I don't keep a gun in my house because...okay crossed a line, delete, start over...

Don: Wow, a LinkedIn friend request. Is this your way, 15 years after the fact, to admitting that you might have actually been an absolute assho...let go of anger, backspace, erase, try again...

Don: Are you retarded, I mean really, and I mean that with no disrespect to people who are actually retarded, but did living south of the Mason-Dixon line scramble your brain in such a way that you thought, just for a moment, that I might actually want to exchange pleasantries with you?....not politically correct, erase, backspace, erase...

Don: Thanks for the LinkedIn request, but I think I'm going to pass. Thanks for thinking of me, though, and best of luck in your job search. Regards, Julie Okay, check for misspellings, residual anger, and...send!

Local Libraries Rolling the Dice and Betting on Casino's Success

As many local Pittsburghers know, earlier this year the Carnegie Library announced the closing of several local branches, including one in Lawrenceville (see photo, left, isn't it lovely?). The library system, like many other nonprofits, has been hit hard by the recession: decreased funding and ever-escalating costs.

Thanks to a number of public rallies, town meetings, and coverage by the local print media in the ensuing months, these libraries--and their patrons--were not going to go down without a fight. While the Commonwealth is not exactly rolling in money, the State House just passed a bill to bring needed funds to City libraries.

The Post-Gazette recently reported that libraries now have an angel investor in an unlikely place: the local casino. Okay, not exactly an angel investor, since the Rivers Casino will be required to give the money through a one percent tax on gross revenues. An additional one percent from the Casino will be earmarked to help fund County libraries and the new Monroeville Convention Center.

Of course, the amounts that are being bandied about are estimated figures, based on what they expect/anticipate (or hope, if you're a pessimist) the casino's revenue to be. To sweeten the pot and to help ensure that the Casino will actually have a better chance of reaching these projected revenues, it would be permitted to expand gaming to include table games.

This legislation is not a done deal, though: it must also pass the State Senate, and not everyone is happy about revenue coming from a required Casino tax. And Pittsburgh City Council has "pledged" $600,000 to support the Hazelwood, West End, Beechview, and Lawrenceville Branches. But as we all know, pledging support and actually cutting a check may be two completely different things.

Pennsylvania State Representative Chelsea Wagner has been vigorously fighting against closing any branches. Ms. Wagner contends that any money provided to the Library be tempered with oversight of where exactly this money will be going. Wagner feels that so far the Library has provided inadequate information about any plan to help raise money for its operational support. "They have not shown any indication that they're going to rev up their efforts to cover their operating costs."

One way the Lawrenceville branch in particular could raise money is through rental income. They have an old auditorium in the basement that for years has been unused. It's fallen into disrepair, but get a bunch of volunteers to spruce it up and rent it out.

Speaking from personal experience, I know how difficult it is to find an auditorium in Pittsburgh at an affordable price. There's lots of great venues--the Hazlett, City Theatre, the Frick, Filmmakers, and Charity Randall. But you've got to pay upwards of $1,000 a night, which is completely out of reach for many nonprofits and other community groups.

The Lawrenceville Library Auditorium may not be as posh as the theatres mentioned above, but it doesn't have to be. Charge a fraction of what those venues charge, invite everyone from political debates to dance recitals to rent out the place. It would go a long way to build goodwill amongst the neighborhood, and the Library would have a nice, regular revenue stream: non-restricted revenue that can go straight towards operational costs. And that's what I call a winning hand.

Area Casino Not Such a Sure Bet

Those of you living in Pittsburgh may remember all of the hoopla associated with the preparation and launching of the Rivers Casino, which recently opened.

First was the debate over where to put this casino. After the powers that be rejected an offer by one developer (who promised to not only build the casino uptown but also to build--completely free of charge--a new arena), the winner ended up being developer Don Bardo. Bardo, whose winning bid placed the casino on the north side, promised, with local politicos joined at his hip, lots of things. Oodles of revenue to reduce everyone's real estate taxes! A boon to the local tourist industry! And who can forget Smokey Robinson, Bardo's bud and business partner, who was going to be a frequent headliner in the casino's lounge.

Not long after the new casino broke ground last year did Bardo get into financial trouble and lost (or couldn't come up with the promised) financing. Another consortium picked up where Bardo left off, and the casino opened to very little fanfare.

A terrific story in the Post-Gazette reported that the Rivers Casino is doing significantly less business than anticipated, and the S&P has reduced its creditworthiness by a notch.

The whole casino debacle has had me scratching my head for so long it's any wonder I have any hair left. To this day, I cannot understand how a plan that included not only a casino but a free arena was passed over by Bardo's north side casino.

It's not a huge surprise to me that the casino is not doing well. For one thing, how the hell do you get over there? The location of the casino is in no man's land, sandwiched between the Carnegie Science Center and Heinz Field in a section of the north side that is completely inaccessible to pedestrians and difficult to reach by car, thanks to a mystifying labyrinth of roads.

The new casino is offering no free shuttle service, which to me is a major misstep. The only shuttle in operation is privately owned and costs $10 each way. While the casino advertises having a complimentary garage, there have been reports that on Steelers game days patrons had to pay up to $50.

Unlike many casinos, the Rivers is becoming famously stingy on its amenities: no free alcohol, soft drinks sparingly doled out, and the casino's "Players Card" giving away very few freebies and players reporting better luck on the machines playing with cash rather than with the Card.

I hate to say I told you so, but I never bought into Ravenstahl's and Onorato's rhetoric that all this money would pour in, which would translate into property taxes being slashed. We're in the middle of a recession, people! No one has money to spend.

The other big problem with the Rivers Casino is the competition. The Meadows racetrack added a casino at about the same time the Rivers opened. Unlike the Rivers, it's right off a major interstate, has ample free parking, and also offers harness racing. While it is south of the city, the Meadows has the advantage of an easy drive and a well-marked route to get them there.

Of course, one only has to drive a bit further on Route 79 past the Meadows to get to Wheeling Downs. There, guests can enjoy the slot machines, and harness racing, and table games. It would be interesting to me to see what kind of decrease Wheeling Downs has experienced from fewer Pennsylvania gamblers. My instincts tell me it's not been much of a dip.

I can't stand the fact that we have gambling in Pittsburgh in the first place, but with that said, if we're going to have gambling here, we might as well take steps to make the casino as attractive as possible. The Rivers can step up to the plate and start offering free shuttle service from downtown, pony up more freebies (especially for Reward Card holders), and offer visitors superlative service. The county (or appropriate powers that be) should take the necessary steps so the Rivers can add table games, making it market competitive and to ensure its long-term success.

Pittsburgh: Finally Back to Normal

The G-20 is now history, and participants, political pundits, and members of the media are lauding Pittsburgh and everyone involved in organizing and coordinating the Summit itself. Luke Ravenstahl is going to throw out his back for all of the patting on the back he's given himself. But--the buzz around town is that we did such a good job that Pittsburgh is being considered for the 2012 G-20 as well as the 2012 Republican National Convention.

The latter, I am sorry to report (not), will likely not come to fruition, due to an insufficient number of hotel rooms in the downtown core, but we'll all have to wait and see if the G-20 returns in three years.

The e-magazine Pop City has a photo slideshow that contains--not to sound cheezy--really striking and dramatic images. Speaking of dramatic images, this blog's own Nut Bar got his 15 minutes of fame when a Post-Gazette photog snapped him marching in the Peoples Protest last Friday (see photo, right). All I can say is, I'm glad I'm on his good side, most of the time anyway, because he's looking pretty intense in this pic, staring down Officer Friendly in his patrol car.

All in all, I would agree with the experts and call the G-20, overall, a success. But where it failed was giving the G-20 attendees an abysmal view of the downtown core. By banning virtually everyone from that area and with vendors boarding up their storefronts, all you needed were a few tumbleweeds and it would look like a ghost town. I understand the need for security, but it's really unfortunate that G-20 delegation had to see the downtown in this manner.

I also realize that previous G-20 summits attracted tens of thousands of protesters, so initially it made sense for Pittsburgh to ramp up the police presence. But as far as protests go, it was pretty much a flat tire from a security perspective. The protest on Thursday was unpermitted (you need a permit from the city to have a march) but a group of self-proclaimed anarchists convened anyway at 40th Street (yep, that's four blocks from my house) and were stopped by the time they got to 32nd or so. Of this group of a few hundred, only 10 people or so were arrested.

The "main" protest occurred on Friday, which was permitted and organized by many groups, including the Thomas Merton Center. This event was organized, well run, and as the police put it "were policed by the protesters." None of the 8,000+ protesters were arrested, which I think is a great testament to the ones doing the protesting as well as the police for exercising good judgment.

What I don't understand is why, why, why, when the main protest concluded, they didn't ratchet down the number of police. At this point, having thousands of officers didn't make much sense: many came in to manage rowdy protesters, and there wasn't really anything for them to do. Why not send the out-of-town officers on their way?

A lot of people are speculating if hosting G-20 was worth the trouble and expense. I think it will certainly help the city in the long-term. Showcasing Pittsburgh on the national news in a positive light can only be a benefit and will help in what I would call the "branding" of the city. But like most branding, it's often hard to quantify the results.

However, in the meantime, the city has to deal with the short-term consequences. I have not heard the latest figures, but even with federal assistance, the city is going to be stuck with a multi-million dollar bill for security. What I want to know is where this money is going to come from. If it ends up coming from my wallet, I won't be too happy about it.

Also, in what I consider a major drop of the ball, downtown eateries and retailers suffered needlessly. The P-G reported that many restaurants, having been told by VisitPittsburgh to expect hordes of people in the week before and week of G-20, stocked up on food and liquor. Then these same restaurants saw the fencing go up, essentially shutting off their venue from anyone from the G-20. Since VisitPittsburgh was one of the major players in the planning of this event, I'd say they have a lot of 'splaining to do.

So one thing I'm going to do is make it a point to visit at as many downtown restaurants as I can. If they're hurting from the G-20, it will give me an excuse to call up a friend to meet for a cocktail. Dirty martini, anyone?

Welcome to the War Zone!

Many friends of mine know I'm a huge fan of end-of-the-world movies. If it's about the world's impending doom or after a handful of nuclear bombs have detonated, I'll be first in line at the theatre. My obsession is so bad that several months ago I had a vivid dream whose story mimicked the new show "Flashforward." But I'll save discussion of that dream--and end-of-the-world movies--for another post.

Because right now, if I didn't know any better, I'd think that Pittsburgh is preparing for the end of the world. My seven block walk from the bus stop to the Law & Finance Building this morning was spooky: lots of boarded up storefronts, street traffic reduced to next to nothing, and the handful of people on the sidewalks were all walking purposefully, eyes downcast. I also saw a lot of police officers: in squad cars, on motorcycles, and on foot with dogs.

This afternoon I'm perched in a downtown office building overlooking the courthouse. Car traffic has not increased, but the silence is pierced by the regular sound of sirens. I just saw a convoy of ten police vehicles gunning down Grant Street--two I noticed from Montgomery County (that's the Philadelphia area, for those unfamiliar with Pennsylvania) and for the last two hours, it's been nonstop beeping and sirens.

But this is the last "normal" day downtown: tonight the barricades go up to cordon off the G-20 zone from the rest of us (code for civilians and those mean, despicable protesters). From what I understand, unless you are involved with the G-20 (delegates, media, police, G-20 volunteers, etc.) or live downtown, no one gets in or out.

During the Summit, buses will be diverted, dropping off passengers on the other side of downtown, for those poor souls who have the misfortune of having to work downtown, outside of the G-20 zone.

For all of Obama's good intentions of letting Pittsburgh showcase all the wonderful things to do and see here, I'm not sure what the G-20 delegates are going to make of all of this. Opinions expressed in recent news articles feel that Pittsburgh will end up losing money rather than making money, based on the added costs for security.

As if this makes it all better, the Summit planning committee will be outfitting volunteers and other helpful individuals with this special pin (shown above). So welcome to Pittsburgh, G-20-ers! Don't mind all of the barbed wire and boarded up buildings--we're the most livable city in the country!

EarthEcycle update

Just a quick update regarding an earlier post regarding EarthEcycle. Since my original post, the EPA has turned back now two (it was originally one) cargo shipments allegedly originating from EarthEcycle headed to South Africa.

As recently reported in the Trib EarthEcycle has asked for an administrative hearing with the EPA, to say, as Jeff Nixon himself (I'm assuming it was him, since he posted the comment anonymously) said, get all of the facts out.

However, EPA spokeperson Deb Berlin said that the request from EarthEcycle came after the deadline given to the company, so it remains to be seen if EarthEcycle's request will be approved.

The Trib further reported that the Monroeville warehouse still contains discarded computer and electronic parts, and that the company stands to potentially be fined up to $37,000 a day if found out of compliance by the EPA. Stay tuned!

Julie & Julia; Julie and that Bobby Guy

Today I went to the movies to celebrate a financially profitable month (thank you, air bed and breakfast) and to escape the hottest day of the summer. Taking the suggestion of a couple friends of mine, I went to see Julie & Julia.

I can't recommend this movie enough: Nora Ephron did a marvelous job interweaving the stories of the two principal characters: Julia Child and her diplomat husband, Paul; and Julie Powell and her editor husband, Eric. I suspect that Meryl Streep will get the lion's share of attention in her portrayal of Julia, but to my mind, Stanley Tucci did just as brilliant a job. The two of them had genuine chemistry and became Julia and Paul quite convincingly onscreen.

Kudos also to Amy Adams and Chris Messina, who also did a great job as Julie and Eric. They gave what I thought were not-over-the-top performances (I mean this as a compliment) and also had a nice on-screen rapport. And of course the fifth star of the movie was the food, and my God, if you don't leave the theatre ravenous, then there's something wrong with you.

Going into the movie I knew more about Julia than I did Julie and of course knew that Julie had written a blog (before everyone and their brother wrote one, myself included). But I knew nothing about what prompted her to start writing. Turns out she had a job in lower Manhattan post-9/11 in a part customer service rep, part ombudsman, part whipping boy as she helped families of the victims. It also turns out that she was also a writer with a half-finished novel and a circle of friends who were uber successful.

On the eve of her 30th birthday, her husband suggests writing a blog, and once she got the idea of working her way through the entire Child cookbook, she took to it like a house afire. As a blogger myself, I shared in her blogger-related joy in parts of the movie ("I got my first comment!" she excitedly shared with a co-worker, then quickly deflates when the identify of the commenter is revealed; then, later "I got 53 comments and they're all from no one I know!").

The movie got me to thinking about this blog, and I thought I'd tell you all why I started mine. Because I guess it never occurred to me to tell you. Duh.

When I was a little girl I loved two things: reading and writing. Growing up in a small town in a fairly remote area, reading gave me an opportunity to be, as Isak Dinesen said, "a mental traveler." And writing gave me the chance to create worlds of my own.

I never thought I was smart enough or good enough to write for a living, so I went to school and took business classes and got a job at a bank. Then fate intervened and I found myself out of a job a few years later. After some "what do I want to do with my life" moments, I decided to go back to school. I got a job at CMU, and took two writing classes there, which I loved. It didn't hurt that I had the good fortune of having some of the smartest English majors in the classes and very supportive professors.

So I graduated and I did a bunch of stuff: consulting, marketing at an engineering firm, working for a bunch of trade associations, and finally starting a charity. When the time came to look for a job last year, I knew I wanted to get back to doing more writing as part of my job.

There's a company in Pittsburgh that is the go-to place for writing, strategic planning, branding, etc. I'd been applying for every available job, when finally I got an interview. As interviews go, it was a weird one, with a guy I'll call Bobby and a girl I'll call Betty (which may or may not be their real names). They made a bunch of snarky, inside-y type of jokes, and I got the sense that sitting at the table interviewing me on the pleasure scale was somewhere between a root canal and having your motherboard crash.

Post-interview, Bobby tells me I have to take a writing test, and emails it to me. It's a draft of a magazine article. It's dreadful. I've been allocated no more than 2 1/2 hours to either re-write or write one from scratch. I research the topic, write the article, checking punctuation, etc., and email it back. Then I get an email back. Apparently it is so bad that Bobby not only doesn't want to hire me, but won't even consider having me work freelance.

Talk about deflated. Then angry--I have a writing degree, dammit. From CMU--known for its writing programs, yes, plural, programs! Then--oopsie--I realize I'm forgetting one trifling detail: I hadn't written anything of any length in over three years! Three years! Of course I sucked!

So just like a marathoner has to stretch muscles and go for a run each day, I decided I had to exercise my brain--or at least the part of the brain that allows me to string words together, anyway. So I had to find a way to write: on a regular basis, doing research, finding topics, coming up with something interesting to say.

So this blog was born. This isn't Tolstoy, but it's my little mental stretching of those writing brain cells. And saying I designed and write a blog looks not bad on my resume. So thanks, Bobby, for giving me a figurative kick in the pants when I was getting too big for my britches. I owe you one. And your weird little friend, too.

Two Attacks: One Local, One Worldwide

I saw the headline on Yahoo! -- shooting in gym kills at least 3, injuring others. It didn't mention the city, and I assumed it happened somewhere else. Then I saw my friend Lori posted on Facebook: "Just wanted to let everyone know I'm okay. I'm a member of LA Fitness, but I wasn't there this morning," and I realized that the shooting happened here in Pittsburgh.

According to reports, George Sodini entered the Collier Township gym and sprayed bullets into a group of women gathered for an early morning exercise class. Then, after killing 3 and injuring 10 more, he turned the gun on himself.

Acquaintances and co-workers recall Sodini seeming like a normal enough guy. Sodini, 48, worked at K&L Gates, doing IT work for the prestigious law firm for the last ten years. He owned a small, tidy home in Scott Township, where his neighbors describe him as friendly, although not overly so.

But it seems Sodini had lots of secrets, which he shared online. Like Richard Pawlawsky, the individual who killed three police officers this spring in Stanton Heights, Sodini also chronicled his ramblings via an online diary. It's full of racial and political epithets, hatred directed at his family, his friends, and his employer.

Fueled by self-proclaimed loneliness, lack of happiness in his life, and his perceived rejection by women over more than a decade juxtaposed against the "young girls here [who] look so beautiful" at 24 Hour Fitness, he begins a plan: arming himself and killing. Read his online diary and you'll find evidence that within his "normal" exterior laid a very troubled man.

While Sodini took great lengths to leave some sort of legacy through his diary (where he urges "copy this to netgroups, where my voice will speak forever"), another individual halfway around the world from Pittsburgh was equally intent on removing the voice of another.

Yesterday, social networking sites Twitter, Facebook, LiveJournal, and the site that hosts this blog, Blogger, were all hacked into. Facebook, LiveJournal, and Blogger (for the most part) stayed online, but Twitter's site completely went dark.

Ordinarily my response would be so what, these sites are fairly frivolous and the worst that could happen is that you have to wait a few hours to take yet another inane Facebook quiz. However, according to published reports, the attack was carefully planned and orchestrated and had only one target: an individual going by the user name Cyxymu.

So what's so special about this guy Cyxymu? Cyxymu is reportedly from the former Soviet republic of Georgia and has been making some statements that made some people angry. So angry, in fact, that they decided to silence Cyxymu by bringing down these web sites. The fact that not only Cyxymu, but the other millions of users also went offline, was apparently just collateral damage.

Internet experts have tracked the hackers location to Abkhazia, a territory along the eastern coast of the Black Sea that's in dispute between Russia and the Republic of Georgia. The presumed thinking was, shut down the websites, and it will shut up the person.

Many of you know that in 2003, I started a nonprofit that brought together volunteers with charities that needed help. Pretty innocuous, right? As it turned out, another charity didn't like what we were doing and threatened us with a lawsuit. When we didn't back down, four weeks later our web site was hacked into and destroyed. Coincidence? I never thought so. The FBI were called in and traced the hackers to overseas, where their jurisdiction ended, and the case was closed.

It was bad enough that this happened, but the hackers hacked into the server and not only destroyed our site, but the 50-60 other sites on the server, not unlike these hackers that brought down an entire site in an attempt to silence one person.

No one wins when a hacking like this takes place. And as these hackers will discover, it won't shut down a single person or a single organization. A few weeks later, my web site was back online, intact and just as strong as ever. I suspect the same will happen to Cyxymu.

Buy One Get One Free Applies to Groceries and Sometimes...Diplomacy

You can laugh at Bill Clinton all you want, but he is the "git er done" man of the hour, paying a visit to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Il and successfully convincing North Korea to free Euna Lee and Laura Ling, the two American journalists arrested in March for illegally crossing the border into North Korea.

Clinton was an unexpected choice, doing what I'll call a "Jimmy Carter" (an ex-president pressed into service to do some quasi-diplomatic work) and sitting down with Kim Jong Il, who, according to an Associated Press report has not met with a prominent leader from the West since allegedly suffering from a stroke a year ago. In fact, Carter might have been a more logical choice, since he himself sat down with Kim Il Sung, Jong Il's father, for similiar, unofficial diplomatic talks in 1994.

The situation of using Clinton reminds me of a slogan used in Clinton's first presidential campaign: buy one, get one free. In that case, it referred to electing Clinton (buy one) and getting the brainpower of Hillary, too (get one free).

It's interesting that this time, roles have been reversed, with Obama appointing Hillary and getting Bill for free. Many politicos squonked about Bill being a detriment when Hillary ran, and I will admit he publicly said some pretty reactive, stupid, off-the-cuff remarks. But maybe, like Carter, he has found his ken as a behind-the-scenes guy smoothing the way with prickly dictators and even closing a few deals.

I'm sure the commentators will express trepitation that he will overextend his power and influence, usurping not only his wife's role as Secretary of State, but of Obama's as well.

And I mean this as no disregard to Clinton (or Albright before her), but despite many Americans thinking that the world is an enlightened a place as we are when it comes to the role and status of women in work and society, it's not. Certainly it's safe to include North Korea into this less-enlightened category.

And while I don't think that anyone should replace Hillary Clinton (or any female in that position) as chief diplomat, perhaps in countries where we know females are treated as third-class citizens, adding to the mix a seasoned (and yes, male) diplomat such as Bill Clinton (or Bill Richardson or John McCain or even Jimmy Carter) makes infinite sense. Especially someone who has a long-standing, positive relationship with a person or country that historically has not been an ally.

Since the journalists' arrest and sentencing Obama, Hillary Clinton, and others in the State Department have issued public apologies to North Korea and asking for the immunity of the arrested journalists. And there were indications that perhaps it wasn't falling on deaf ears.

In July, Ling (through a phone call to her sister Lisa Ling, herself a National Geographic Channel correspondent) reported that she and Lee were never transferred to prison after sentencing, but were rather being held in what was classified as a "guest house". It was speculated that while they were not free per se, their kind of house arrest was preferable and more humane than in transferring them into the North Korean jail system.

I have long said that North Korea is the country to watch, especially with Kim Jong Il at the helm. Not to discount the unrest and atrocities in other parts of the world, but we sometimes tend to forget this little island country that now, suddenly, has nuclear capability and a leader that doesn't always seem to think too rationally. I am hopeful that this is but a small step in a series of other steps to open up diplomatic talks with North Korea.