Two Steps Forward, One Step Back?

A few weeks ago on craigslist I saw a posting for an experiment at Pitt. For two hours of your time, you join a small group, discuss politics, and then receive a $25 Giant Eagle gift card. Sounded to me like pretty easy money.
The group I participated in met last night: amongst the college senior, recent college grad, and I was an older woman. I would guess her age to be in her late 50’s or early 60’s, but it was difficult to determine exactly because she wore huge, “Jackie-O” style sunglasses and a blonde, Pamela Anderson type wig, ripped jeans, and a black hoodie emblazoned with a silver cartoon voodoo doll stuck with pins.

The meeting facilitator passed out the questions we as a group were to discuss, which centered around race and the latest presidential election. The political and racial lines became quickly drawn between the three of us (college student, recent grad, and me) and this older woman.

I initially thought that because this was an experiment taking place in the Sociology Department of Pitt, this woman was a plant. The wig, the sunglasses, the nature of her remarks, it had to be a disguise, a jokey caricature of what people perceive a racist to be. Surely she was brought into the group only as a provocation to see what our reaction would be.

Then, as she went from one tangential, stream-of-consciousness rant to another, I realized that this was no plant at all, but a person who genuinely believed the venom that came out of her mouth. Her remarks included her belief that whites are the superior race; now that “that man” is in the white house, she fears that “those people will take over everything." She expressed her outrage towards a neighbor who has a black boyfriend. On and on it went, for nearly two hours, until the Facilitator finally stopped the experiment and escorted the woman out of the building.

While I thought the group showed an unbelievable amount of restraint, the Facilitator and the three of us were incredulous. For me, what initially began as amazement and amusement, quickly gave way to the sad realization that this was no joke: as demonstrated by this woman, racism is alive and well.

I and millions of Americans swelled with pride on inauguration day to witness an African-American man being sworn in as President, and for that moment thought we had come so far as a nation. We have come far, but as the woman brought home the point so dramatically, we still have such a long way to go.

Have You Heard the Latest? Gossip Maven Gets the Axe.

When I think of Gossip Lady (no, not the vapid show, Gossip Girl), I always think of Liz Smith. With her trademark southern charm and every-hair-always-in-place blond pageboy, Smith is an institution, and like her colleague Army Archerd, her name became synonymous with gossip.

Smith covered all the salacious gossip fit to print for over 33 years in her regular column for the New York Post, which ran in syndication in over 70 publications nationwide. For many years, Smith was the one celebrities ran to, telling their secrets, and under her gentle--but persistent--questioning, Smith was famous for getting the dish that others only dreamed about.

But this year the Post opted not to renew Smith's annual contract and on February 26, it ran the last column. Smith reacted to the news with her usual aplomb: "I'm very sorry that that has come to an end, and that I wasn't valuable enough for them to keep me on," she stated in Sally Kalson's recent column.

While Smith worked in the business of scandal and titillation, she was a class act. It's sad to see the old guard taking a backseat to the more in-your-face antics of TMZ. With both a web site as well as a popular syndicated TV show, TMZ has crews staked out at airports, restaurants, stores, and even the houses of the rich and famous. Their stick-a-camera-in-the-face style of reporting with the crew shouting inane questions has become the de rigour style of gossip mongering.

While Smith will no longer be seen in the pages of newspapers, she will continue to do her own brand of gossiping online at Women on the Web's web site, and Post contract or not, the 86-year-old Smith shows no signs of slowing down. All I can say is, you dish, girl!

What's Next, Jimmy Choo 101?

I really hate to pick on CMU, it being my alma mater and all, but today the Post-Gazette--on Page One above the fold, no less--featured a story about a new course being offered at Carnegie Mellon. Is it "Financial Accounting (and How to Avoid Ponzi Schemes)"? Nope. How about "Environmental Engineering With Green Technology"? No way. "Robot Technology and Human Interaction"? Not a chance.

It's (drum roll, please) "Sneakerology 101", or as I call it, the 101st reason not to give my alma mater any money. The Post-Gazette article enthusiastically reports about the newest course offering, "delv[ing] into the impact of sneakers on identity and culture."

Now, I love my Chuck Taylor's just as much as the next person, but a course solely (sorry I couldn't resist) devoted to what's essentially gym shoes? I guess the joke is on me and everyone else who thinks this is completely ridiculous, because students are lining up around the block to take it.

Students in the class, self-labeled "sneakerheads", lap up such inciteful information "as early hip-hop roots,...shoe design and technology, and the effect of boutiques and limited-edition releases." Students' final assignment is to design their own sneaker--and write a description about it. And I thought Foucault was tough!

Field trips include such intellectually-stimulating adventures as pre-dawn trips to stand in line at Foot Locker to assess...a new shoe release. Class debates included which Air Jordan sneaker Michael Jordan wore in the 1985-1986 season. Now that's useful information to banter about in those pesky I'm-about-to-graduate-and-need-a-job interviews!

I suppose the only logical next step is to put the shoe on the other foot, so to speak, and give the ladies a chance to learn all about their favorite footwear: the high heel. I'm imagining field trips to Nordstrom to view the fall line of Manolo Blahnik's, stimulating lectures by physicians who discuss bunions and hammer toes, and viewings of "Sex and the City" to examine the idle lives of rich thirty-something women and their shallow materialistic shoe fetishes. Any takers?

Brother, Can You Spare $65 Million?

Carnegie Mellon University has a reputation--and a very effective PR machine perpetuating it--for being one of the top-class business schools in the country (if not the world). So this is why I'm continuing to scratch my head in amazement at how the financial wizards at CMU could have been duped into a Ponzi scheme.

This Ponzi scheme was not with the now-incarcerated Bernard Madoff, but rather with Westridge, an investment firm based in New York City. According to a recent article in the Post-Gazette, one or more of CMU's trustees knew the principals at Westridge. With cronyism firmly established, CMU proceeded to invest nearly $65 million with Westridge.

As many of you know, I am an alumna (and former employee) of Carnegie Mellon. I actually took a leave of absence from my secure, fairly well-paying job to attend school full time. In hindsight, it was the best decision I made: I received a superb education there.

Amongst all of the book-learning I did, one of the best bits of wisdom I learned at CMU was this: don't take anything at face value. Ask questions, put things in a context. To quote Ronald Reagan: "trust, then verify."

Perhaps the powers-that-be at CMU need to return to the classroom to learn this lesson again, as it was long on trust and short on verifying. Westridge sent rosy financial statements to CMU, which apparently CMU believed without question. CMU continued to invest money, perhaps blinded by greed, seemingly not asking about the veracity of these reports.

So now they've lost over $65 million, and on February 20 they filed suit against Westridge. This whole mess has become the big elephant in the room that CMU is not talking about. Nary a peep on their web site, no public comment about this whole mess.

Instead, the CMU Fundraising Machine wasted no time plotting a new scheme as to how to get their coffers re-filled--by their alumni, of course! Last week I received a passionate letter from CMU. In it they talked about "this difficult economic climate" and imploring me to give "whatever I can."

Instead of giving money, I'm choosing instead to give some advice. So CMU, here it is: rather than send alumni letters asking them for money, how about a letter with an explanation and/or update about the CMU/Westridge situation, and a great big mea culpa for the whole thing. And throwing in some assurances that they'll make sounder financial investment choices in the future.

And in the meantime, I'll be making my own sound investments...for myself.

Art or Eyesore?

As I mentioned in yesterday's post, the law caught up with a man police describe as the "second most wanted graffiti artist" (I guess that makes him the Hertz of local graffiti artists). Last year police caught Ian Debeer spray painting a bridge in Etna, and during a subsequent search of his house police discovered and seized dozens of cans of spray paint, specialty nozzles, and photos of his "HERT" graffiti tag.

Since last year, detectives have been gradually building a case against Debeer, matching 165 of the photos found at Debeer's apartment to graffiti sites all over Allegheny County. During an arraignment concerning the incident in Etna, police arrested Debeer for 73 counts of criminal mischief. All told, Debeer caused over $200,000 worth of damage to local government, commercial, and privately-owned properties.

According to an article in the Post-Gazette, Pittsburgh is becoming the unofficial graffiti capital of the country, where barely-out-of-their-teens like Debeer come to Pittsburgh, tag as many buildings as they can, all in an effort to gain street cred. While the city has a Graffiti Task Force, apparently it has upped the ante of these graffiti artists. Evidently, the more police investigate the matter, the better the street cred amongst fellow artists.

Police estimate that an astounding 65 graffiti crews with as many as 650 individuals are spray painting all over the city. They are organized and carefully plan their attack, armed with specially-designed equipment to help them do the job. It seems no building, no bridge, no concrete surface, no matter how difficult to access, is off limits to them.

On one hand, I see young individuals with enormous, albeit misguided, creative potential. I'd love to know where their parents fit into the equation. Creative kids should be at the Art Institute, studying art and learning how to apply their talent towards a creatively rewarding, legal means of employment. These graffiti artists are artists: they take pride in their work, they find venues that have maximum exposure, and spend thousands of dollars in supplies and equipment to ensure that they have what they need to do the job.

On the other hand, graffiti artists apply their art to buildings that don't belong to them, without the permission of the building owners. Tagging is illegal, and taggers give police and the property owners the middle finger every time they tag a building. Painting over or removing a graffiti tag takes time and money--if the tag can even be effectively removed.

I wish I had a simple solution, but unfortunately this is a complex issue. I understand both sides of the argument. Other cities have adopted a "free wall" zone--where graffiti artists can tag without the fear of punishment. However, most reports I have read seem that free wall programs have been more a failure than a success. Free wall program administrators explain that because part of the tagging experience is the thrill of doing something illegal, graffiti artists say that tagging on a free wall is not as fulfilling. Tagging on a free wall makes them feel like they are conforming, something contrary to the credo of taggers.

There are several types of coatings that can be applied to walls and other graffiti-prone surfaces. How about making this product available to property owners especially vulnerable to tagging at a discount? I think that arrested graffiti artists should be required to remove or paint over the tag, then apply the anti-graffiti compound--all at the expense of the arrested individual.

Arrested individuals who pay restitution to the owners of the tagged buildings, who serve their jail sentences without getting into trouble while incarcerated, perhaps go through some group therapy to confront and talk about their wanting to tag, could become eligible for special training, perhaps through a cooperative program with the Art Institute or Carnegie Mellon University. Those recently released from prison go into a halfway house (or wear an ankle bracelet) where they continue to be monitored, but now also go to school and perhaps get a part-time job that goes towards their restitution.

I don't think adding more police is the answer--that will only provoke an escalation on the side of the taggers. The solution has to include dialogue with the taggers and programs that both punish taggers for their illegal behavior as well as providing incentives and opportunities to steer their energies in a more construction--and legal--way.

Doggy Downers & the Wrong Kind of Little Hug

I was going to write about the Pittsburgh graffiti artist that got arrested today for causing nearly a quarter million dollars' worth of damage, but then I saw two stories on the newswire making up an eerily similar theme. Coincidence? I'll let you decide.

First, in a case perhaps inspired by the movie Nine to Five, a women in Arkansas was arrested today for allegedly putting tranquilizers in her boss' coffee. While Lily Tomlin's character in Nine to Five accidentally added rat poison to her boss' cup of coffee ("It [the rat poison box] looks just like the Skinny & Sweet--except for the little skull and crossbones on the box"), this time, it appears to be no accident.

Perhaps as a means to defend her actions, the woman reportedly stated that her boss, a veterinarian at the animal shelter where they both worked, needed to "chill out". Apparently she thought that a large dose of tranquilizers might do the trick.

Also reported today by the AP, ten children in Arkansas became sick when they drank windshield washer fluid. This happened at a Little Rock daycare center where the owner of the daycare mistook the jug of washer fluid for a container of Kool-Aid and served it to the children. Talk about putting a brand new spin on the warning "don't drink the Kool-Aid".

Fortunately, only one of the children remains hospitalized, and is reported to be in good condition. The very distraught owner of the daycare has voluntarily forfeited her daycare license, pending an investigation into the matter.

I've always thought when I saw those "Blueberry" Little Hugs drinks looked like windshield washer fluid--they're the exact same shade of blue, so for me it was no surprise that this sort of mix-up happened.

I don't have any plans to travel to Arkansas, but my suggestion to those who are are to make your own coffee and avoid any blue-tinted drinks.

Bernie, Welcome To Your New Home!

Bernard Madoff appeared in court today and pled guilty to swindling more than half a billion dollars from his clients. As reported in a story by the Associated Press, applause broke out in the courtroom when Judge Chin revoked bail and court officials led Madoff away in handcuffs.

Many legal pundits and victims believe that some of the monies landed at the feet of Madoff's wife, pointing to the Manhattan penthouse and other properties deeded in her name. However, we might never know with absolute certainty where all of the money went--and where all of the seizable assets might be. This is because Madoff, who pled guilty without asking for or accepting any plea bargain, is not required to cooperate with the Attorney General's office.

The press has reported on some of the victims of Madoff's Ponzi scheme, including individuals, trusts, and charitable foundations. According to the AP story, many of Madoff's victims were Jewish, and trusted Madoff because he was Jewish also.

Perhaps most egrecious of Madoff's crimes was the fleecing Nobel Prize winner and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel. Allegedly Wiesel has been wiped out financially, both of his personal assets as well as the endowment of his charitable foundation. If ripping off one of this world's most highly regarded humanitarians doesn't put you in the express lane to the gates of hell, I don't know what will.

I'm sure it is little comfort to Wiesel and Madoff's other victims, but Madoff's accommodations are spartan at best. The (New York) Metropolitan Correction Center released information about Madoff's new digs, including the photo shown above. While it's not clear whether or not Madoff will share his cell with a roommate, it will certainly be a far cry from his recently-departed $7 million Manhattan penthouse. Described as "about the size of a closet", the 60 square foot cell contains the barest of accommodations: a bunk bed, small desk and stool, locker for personal items, and a sink and toilet. Here he will stay until his sentencing, which takes place in June.

It is my hope that once sentencing takes place and Madoff is transferred to his permanent prison location, that his accommodations remain as they are now. No "country club" prison, no kid glove handling, but a place as equally dark and dismal to the despair of his many victims.

Penn Brewing Saga Finally Resolved

Penn Brewing's beer may now be produced in the eastern part of the state, but fans of its restaurant will be happy and relieved to know that the North Side eatery will continue operating.

Founded in 1986 by Tom Pastorius, Penn Brewing offered Pittsburgh its first taste of locally-made microbrew, made by an authentic German Brewmaster and distributed from its brewery on Vinial Street right on the North Side. Besides the brewery, the facility included the aforementioned Hofbrau restaurant that paired its many beer offerings with authentic German cuisine. The building housing the restaurant/brewery is a historic landmark built in the early 1900's (in what was then Deutchstown). The beer garden outdoor courtyard is paved with cobblestones constructed in the same period.

Both the beer and restaurant quickly became successful, winning many prestigious awards for its beer, most recently two medals at the Great American Beer Festival: a gold for its Kaiser Pilsner and a bronze for the more robust Oktoberfest.

Penn Brewing's successful enterprise spawned similar local microbrew/restaurants in the 1990's: Lawrenceville's Church Brew Works and the Strip's Valhalla and Foundry Ale Works. While Church Brew remains open, Valhalla and Foundry Ale Works have both shuttered: Valhalla is now the upscale wine bar/restaurant Eleven and Foundry Ale's site has morphed into offices for a local nonprofit.

Penn Brewing CEO Len Caric (Pastorius, retired in 2003, remains a financial stakeholder) revealed in an article in the Post-Gazette that plans had already been made to relocate main production to Lion Brewery in Wilkes-Barre. The switch became necessary when the North Side facility couldn't keep up with increasing demand. When production switched over to Lion in early 2009, the North Side site planned to focus its attention on developing additional varieties of beer, while continuing to operate the restaurant.

However, it seemed this plan was not to be, as Penn Brewing received some bad news in late 2008 from its landlord, E&O Partners. According to Caric, E&O increased the rent by 360%, increasing the cost per square foot as well as adding to the lease square footage (such as the outdoor beer garden and loading dock facilities) that had never been included in the square footage calculation.

However, thanks to efforts of many, including David Malone of E&O, Penn Brewing's Caric, and Northside Leadership Conference's Executive Director Mark Fatla, a new, five-year lease (with an option for a five-year extension) was recently inked. While the restaurant closed briefly, it re-opened March 3. And although most of the brewery equipment had been sold in anticipation of the closing, Caric stated in a March 1 news conference that he intends to rebuild the brewery and return to making beer onsite.

What you won't read in the press is how generous Penn Brewing has been to local charities. For PSVN's fundraisers as well as countless other charity fundraisers, Penn Brewing generously donated kegs of beer, which were always cheerfully delivered and set up by one of the Penn Brewing salespeople. Penn Brewing proved that with the right plan and a high-quality product, start-up companies can succed, and indeed thrive.

While I don't drink much Penn Pilner these days, it really would have been a shame to see Penn Brewing's operation completely come on the North Side. I'm glad that both sides were able to reach an agreement and that the I raise my glass to more beer and schnitzel over at Vinial Street. Salut!

Every Rose Has Its Thorn

December 20, 1965: a day that will live in infamy. Not because a war began on this day, or an important person died, but rather the birth of a TV show type that now has America whipped into a frenzy. This date was the premier of a television show that became part of America's pop culture: The Dating Game.

For those needing a brush-up on the format, The Dating Game gave a woman a chance to ask three men cheeky questions and based on their answers (she was only able to hear and not see them), chose one to go on a date. This campy show was fun and provided harmless entertainment: everything was done with a wink and a nod, not taking itself too seriously. The format and premise of the show was simply a novel way to get on TV (good for the aspiring actor or actress) and maybe end up on a date.

Times have certainly changed. Fast forward 40 years and you'll see TV's gone from a relatively harmless game show to today's more slickly-produced reality shows, with the stakes escalating exponentially. Today's reality show contestants aren't merely seeking 15 minutes of fame and the chance at a date, they're looking for the love of their lives. And instead of competing against two other contestants, it's now more than two dozen.

Everyone loves a good love story, and when creating the reality show The Bachelor/Bachelorette, the producers must have thought they had a winning formula: to see a love story unfold is from beginning to end, and filming the process, including the most intimate of moments. You get to see the first hello, the first date, first kiss, first declaration of love, and finally, the moment everyone waits for, the proposal of marriage on bended knee.

In reality (no pun intended), the story is a lot less pure than that, when you have 25 women competing against one other for the aforementioned kiss, love talk, and marriage proposal. It's the yin to the love yang: the cat fights, and the manipulation, and the bitchiness, all done while trussed up in designer gowns and living in a palatial mansion in the Hollywood Hills.

Of course, Americans ate it up: picking and rooting for favorite contestants, analyzing every detail of the budding romances, and seeing, week after week, contestants being systematically eliminated, when the Bachelor offers roses to the women he wants to stay, while the rest get the boot. Eliminated contestants are each filmed in the obligatory "weeping in the limousine" scene as they drive away from the palatial mansion, the broken dream, crying in despair, "But we had a connection! We were perfect for each other! I could totally spend the rest of my life with him!"

Then, as the limo drives continues, despair then turns to anger: "I can't believe he didn't eliminate (insert name of the omnipresent bitchy girl here)! He doesn't know what a mistake he made. He's going to regret eliminating me--I was the best thing that ever happened to him!"

While this show is billed as a drama ("it's the most dramatic rose ceremony EVER!!!!), to me it's always been a comedy. Thirteen seasons of The Bachelor and four seasons of The Bachelorette have yielded exactly one marriage: not exactly great odds. One couple is reportedly still together, Bachelor and bass fishing champ--no, I'm not making this up--Byron and his ladee love, Mary. However, their future may now be less rosy since Mary was arrested about a year ago for battery against man-love Byron.

The latest scandale is centered on Jason Mesnick, the latest Bachelor incarnation. Deciding between his two final contestants was the brash brunette (and former Dallas Cowboy cheerleader) Melissa and the more demure, blonde Molly. In the most dramatic rose ceremony EVER, Jason dissed Molly, cried like a baby, then turned on the smiles two minutes later and proposed to Melissa.

Six weeks after aforementioned proposal, all is not well with Jason, who broke up with Melissa on national TV, and then, two minutes later, cozied up to formerly dissed Molly and asked for a second chance. Just last week Jason and Molly appeared together on TV and guess what: they're in love. Forever. And this time they mean it!

The entire idea of finding true love on a reality game show is ludicrous. One marriage out of 17 attempts (I'm not counting Jason and Molly as a success just yet) puts them on par with Survivor's "Boston Rob" and "Ambah"--and that wasn't even a show about dating.

All over America, people have been wringing their hands about Jason, villainizing him for his behavior. If there is a villain to the story, it is the producers. After seeing dismal ratings and outrage when The Bachelor/Bachelorette didn't come up with the money shot (the proposal, the bended knee, the promise of forever), you've got to figure they exerted none-too-subtle pressure on Jason to give them what they want and the viewers need. I appreciate his honesty, and his decision: to pursue a relationship--off camera, this time--with the girl he was ultimately attracted to. Good luck, you crazy kids!

Dok--or Just Dork?

Do you remember a couple of years ago when rumors began swirling that Lynn Swann was running for governor? When the rumors started, my reaction, like many people's, was "Why do you think he's running?" "Is this a joke?" "What kind of experience does he have?" and "Just because he's a former Steeler doesn't make him qualified to govern a state."

The rumor turned out to be true, and I'm not sure what was the bigger shocker--that he actually launched a campaign and did so with a straight face, or the fact that he's a Republican.

About a week ago I heard a similiarly preposterous rumor, this time for the upcoming Pittsburgh Mayoral race. No, not a city councilperson, or the mayor of a small borough running in the race, but none other than someone connected to another Super Bowl champ, Franco Harris. This time it's Harris' son, Franco "Dok" Harris. The fact that he is under 30 and has no political experience isn't standing in the way of his Mayoral bid--he has his Dad's good Steelers mojo going for him!

Okay, it's not quite this bad. On paper, he has an impressive resume...educationally. He's a graduate of Princeton University and CMU's Tepper School of Business/Pitt Law School. His undergraduate degree from Princeton is in Politics, and at CMU/Pitt besides getting an MBA and a JD, he won multiple awards for his business planning and entrepreneurial skills.

But--book smarts does not a politician make: reading a book about politics is miles away from actually running for--and then governing as--Mayor of a large city.

According to the information provided on his disastrously-designed web site (Did he get a guy from craigslist to do it for him for free? I hope so, because if he paid real money for it, it's his first bad spending decision.), his only political experience is confined to student council as an undergrad. He never once volunteered for a political campaign, he has never interned for a congressperson or other political figure, and--most importantly--he's never held public office.

There's a little thing I'd like to share with Mr. Harris: it's called paying your dues. I hate to break it to you, but coming from a wealthy family, going to Ivy League schools, and being under 30 does not actually entitle or qualify you to become mayor. It comes from working on campaigns, starting out at the ground level, and learning about the political process as a participant, not as the candidate when the ink on your sheepskin is barely dry.

Good God, even Ravenstahl knows this: he may be under 30 and a former beeper salesman, but at least he comes from a political family, learned the business at the knee of his father, and then ran and served as a councilman before becoming mayor. We may scoff at his relative youth, but at least he held office before becoming mayor.

My advice, if I may be as bold as to offer Harris some advice, would be this: you have great academic experience and are clearly a smart guy. But: if you want a future in politics, you need follow in the footsteps of your idol, President Obama: be humble, learn from others by working in their campaigns, and then foray that experience into running for office, starting small. Swann was not taken seriously, and neither will you--and he's a beloved figure with Super Bowl rings dripping from his fingers!

Having no political experience and running your first campaign as Mayor is nothing short of political suicide. And you're too smart with too bright a future to have it all snuffed out by one very bad decision.

An Energy-Saving Plan You Can Sink Your Teeth Into

Awhile back, I was watching an episode of Oprah that focused on decreasing your electricity use. The expert on the show talked about something I had not thought about: all of the appliances that use electricity even when they're "off".

It's a phenomenon that's called "Vampire Power"--appliances that use electricity even when you're not using them. When I first heard about this, I really thought this was much ado about nothing: you turn your TV off, and it's off, right? Well, not exactly. It seems that a lot of appliances, even when they are in the "off" position, are still drawing electricity, because they're in standby mode.

The expert on the Oprah show claimed that up to 25 percent of your electric usage was from this so-called "Vampire Power". This number sounded high to me, so I went to my old friend Wikipedia to see what they had to say about it. Wikipedia reported that the energy usage can reach up to 22 percent of all appliance consumption, and around 10 percent of total residential consumption--in other words, your electric bill will likely decrease by 10 percent if you completely turn off appliances with standby power.

So I tried a little experiment. Upstairs, I began turning off the power strip that connected the TV, VCR/DVD player, and cable box when I wasn't watching TV. I unplugged the clock-radio in the guest room. My boom box is unplugged when not being used.

Downstairs, I swapped out my ten year old desktop computer to my newly-acquired laptop computer, and turned off that power strip when the computer wasn't in use. I unplugged my programmable coffee maker unless I was making coffee and unplugged the stove (which had a built-in clock--which never worked right, anyway) when not in use. I also changed out the eight incandescent bulbs in my dining room to compact florescent lights (CFL's).

In the words of the late, great Monkees, I'm a believer! Consumption of electricity upstairs (yes, I have two electric meters in my house) has decreased 17 percent, even with the cold winter that we've had (and the furnace clicking on more often).

The big news, however, is consumption downstairs. My electric bill has decreased by a whopping 52 percent! Sure, the CFL's were expensive (specialty chandelier-sized bulbs cost about $6 each), but I've recouped this cost and then some in the six months or so that I've swapped them out.

If you want to take similar measures in your home, it's pretty easy. Generally speaking, anything with a remote and/or a built-in clock consumes electricity, even when it's off. Things such as lamps with an on/off switch don't consume electricity when turned to the off position. You can easily turn off appliances by using a power strip that has an on/off switch.

Of course, you can also do a lot of common sense things that also add up: take my lead and swap out your incandescent bulbs with CFL's. They last a long time (some of mine are nearly 10 years old) and consume a fraction of what an incandescent bulb does. Just remember that CFL's light is usually dimmer than incandescent, so opt for the highest wattage (you'll still save money). You can also (duh) turn lights off in rooms that aren't being used. If you like to leave a light on for home security's sake, get one of those timers so that it comes on and off only when it's dark.

And I think you'll see that these relatively small changes can add up to significant savings. And you'll be using less vampire power-bwaaahaaaahaaahaaahaaa!