08 January, 2008

An Emotionally Wrenching Day

I'm writing this in my word processing program on the train back into NYC, where I will then take the subway back to Forest Hills.

Today was emotionally wrenching for me. I wound up spending the night in Throgs Neck at my friend's because I went over to her place in the afternoon to help resolve a problem that she was having with her computer and wound up working until almost midnight, and by then I was just too exhausted to spend the two hours it would take me on NYC's subway system to get back to where I was apartment sitting for my friend in Forest Hills (remember that I've been homeless for about the past two years and have been couch hopping among friends since then).

Originally my mother was supposed to come out and see me in Forest Hills, pick me up, and take me to Yonkers where I could finally get to the police station there and file a complain/report regarding what happened to me in October/November/December, and how a really disturbed individual named Louis Rivera pretended to be my friend in order to have me star in his own personal soap opera (at least, this is what it feels like to me). I've previously written about that on my Gather account and, in fact, the narrative was so long that I wound up breaking it up into three separate parts (I'm eventually going to have to post a Part IV...).

So instead I had to call my mother and give directions to my younger brother (who was driving) to my friend's place in Throgs Neck. This actually turned out for the better as it meant that they wouldn't have to drive as far to retrieve me (they live west of Hartford, CT, which is about a bit over two hours from where I was staying in Throgs Neck). Also, my friend is right off a main highway in Throgs Neck, which is a branch of the highway that they would have taken down from Hartford. So this part of it worked out better. My brother said that he would probably arrive between 11 in the morning and noon.

At approximately 1:30pm, my brother and mother finally arrive. I obtain directions to the 2nd Precinct of the Yonkers Police Department and we depart. Once we arrive at the Yonkers PD, 2nd Precinct, I advise the desk sargeant (or whatever his rank was) as to the reason of my visit there, and he tells me that it's probably going to be a long wait. Apparently, the City of Yonkers was going to hell that day and all of their officers were occupied and unable to take a report from me.

I waited at the Yonkers PD for nearly three hours before an officer (a team, actually; I guess they work in teams there) was able to speak with me. And what's worse, because I ended up spending the night in the Bronx (Throgs Neck) instead of going back to Forest Hills (Queens), I didn't have what I really needed in order to lodge the complaint. The officers informed me that there really wasn't anything that they could do because I didn't have bank statements or whatever showing what had been done. They didn't seem to think it a big deal that Louis Rivera still has my old notebook computer, clothing, a suitcase, notebook computer case, diary, debit cards, driver's license, social security card, Medicare card, shopping club cards, checkbook (to my old account) and just about every other important piece of information that helps to identify me. I suppose that because I informed the officers that I had canceled all of my cards, that they didn't think anything was pressing.

Even though I pleaded with the officers to at least open a report, as it is extremely difficult for me to get there via public transportation, they advised me that the best they could do for me was to give me an incident report, which they marked as not having a police report being filed at that time, but when I returned (they advised that I must do so in person) then at least I would have a starting point. So I left there with a small slip of paper with an incident report on it. They took down my name, address, phone number, and email address, and the name and addrees of Louis Rivera (I didn't have his phone number on me as I'd left my mobile phone in Forest Hills when I left for my friend's in Throgs Neck the day before).

So my visit to the Yonkers Police Department was not nearly as productive as I had hoped that it would be.

I also had planned to go up to my bank, and my branch of my bank, to close my new checking account and open yet another new checking account there, without ID (which is why I wanted to go to my branch), because of fraudulent activity that has been taking place on my new checking account. (You may recall that I had to close my old account because of the fraudulent activity that Louis Rivera was conducting on that account.) Needless to say, because of the wait that I had at the Yonkers PD, I wasn't able to make it to the bank in time.

After I was finally finished with the Yonkers PD (it was almost five pm by this point), my mother was complaining that she needed to eat (she's diabetic) so we went to Kam Sen, the Asian Market in White Plains, NY where, in addition to offering everything that an Asian supermarket offers, they also cook food on the premises either for take-out or dining on the premises (they have some cafe-styled tables and chairs set up near where the food is served for people to sit down and eat a quick meal). So we got food, ate, and then my mother bought me some food so I could cook and not have to spend as much money on eating out (which is usually what I do).

As it was too late to get to my bank so I could open a new account,, we wound up going to visit my sister, who lives with my grandfather. Also residing in the household now are my uncle (the one who kicked me out of my grandfather's home), my sister's boyfriend, her daughter, and her godson. Earlier in the day I had called what I thought was my sister's mobile phone number, but my uncle answered and advised me that it was now my grandfather's number, and I asked him for my sister's number and he gave that to me. I really did not want to speak with him and I never call the house number for this very purpose. He was all nice and everything but I just can't deal with it. He's nice one minute and a POS the next.

In any event, I wasn't planning on coming into the house, especially since I'd previously been told that I wasn't allowed inside anymore. But after waiting about 15 minutes in the car while my mother visited with her daughter (my sister) and her granddaughter (my niece), my uncle came outside and told me that my sister wanted to see me, inside. Great, just what I wanted to have happen: interaction with my uncle who likes for nothing better than to screw with my mind.

Oh, have I mentioned that I also haven't seen my grandfather since I was thrown out of the home by my uncle?

OK, so I go inside. I see my sister and she just doesn't look right. [Update: I finally figured out why she wasn't looking "right": she was pale, very, very pale....] I'd been trying to get hold of her since last week--when she told me that she was going in for every test under the sun because they found a lump in her breast, and she's only 31--but she hasn't been online, so of course my anxiety disorder takes over and I start thinking the worst.

I guess that this time, I had reason to be anxious and to think the worst. My sister has a very invasive form of breast cancer—Invasive Ductal Carcinoma, Grade 2—and she is scheduled for a total mastectomy of both breasts with axillary dissection, which means that she will have both of her breasts completely removed at the ripe old age of 31, as well as some of the lymph nodes in her breast/back, and then undergo a harsh chemotherapy treatment and, if the results from the lymph removal come back as being positive, then she will also undergo additional surgery to have all of her upper-body lymph nodes removed and then begin radiation treatment. Oh, and did I mention that the reason my mother came down this way was because she has an appointment for a mammogram tomorrow in Bridgeport, CT?

Now here's the thing ... approximately five years ago, I had a lump form in my right breast. There is an estensive family history of breast cancer in my family: my mother has already had a lumpectomy in each of her breasts, the first one occurring in the Fall of 2002—the same year as my automobile accident; both of my grandmothers also were diagnosed with breast cancer, and my paternal grandmother wound up requiring a mastectomy as a result of the cancer in one of her breasts.. Because of this history, I underwent a mammogram and ultrasound to determine if the lump was cancerous. The doctors were fairly certain that the lump was not cancerous and just a cyst at this point, and advised against further testing; however, they did advise me to have the lump checked out every two years via a bi-annual mammogram. Due to a variety of factors (no/little insurance, not having a primary care doctor, etc.), I haven't followed up on their advice. Due to the recent developments with my sister, I believe that I now am left with no choice and must figure out a way to get a mammogram scheduled ASAP.

My sister is absolutely devastated because she went to the plastic surgeon yesterday for a consultation, which she advises me is “practically required for women my age”, and the plastic surgeon showed her images of what she would look like without breasts. He also told her that they would insert something into her breasts that would, over the course of six weeks or so, be inflated, so that when she was completed with her chemotherapy and radiation treatments, implants could then be inserted with minimal effort.

I can only imagine what my sister is going through. She already has body image problems (like me, she's morbidly obese, although unlike me she was more svelte as a teenager and put weight on as she grew into adulthood; I was the opposite as I was quite “chunky” as a kid growing up and wound up taking off the weight in college but I have put all of it back on afte my automobile accident, because I am unable to physically move around like I was before the accident. But I digress....

She's had relationship problems with her boyfriend (the father of her daughter), and he's left her for other women in the past, although now they seem to be doing OK but one never knows. Add to this the fact that she will be losing both here breasts, at the age of 31, and the body image problems rise exponentially. She confided in me that she doesn't want to have to undergo any more surgeries (she had an injury to her arm while she was in college and she also has had, from time to time, some sort of growths in her intestines removed) and she really doesn't want to have to undergo plastic surgery to have breast implants. I told her that she didn't have to undergo any medical procedure that she didn't want to but she responded that, because of her age, they were essentially dictating that she undergo therapy and have fake breasts put on as it was too psychologically damaging for a woman of her early years to have both breasts removed. I'm not sure I buy that answer; if you don't want to undergo a procedure then you aren't required to undergo it.

However, what I didn't pick up on was that my sister was talking about not wanting to undergo any of it, including the removal of the cancerous lumps in the first place. I advised her, as gently as I could, that should she choose that route then she was certainly fortelling her early demise, and I know that that's not what she really wanted, especially given how much she cares about and loves her daughter. She responded that if such was the case then that wasn't a good thing, and she truly seemed torn by the decision to have both of her breasts removed or face certain death.

As we were getting ready to leave, I my grandfather had emerged from his room. He was sittting in a chair in the living room. He is wheeled around the house in a wheelchair. He has a chair that he can slump into in the living room (it's one of those chairs that rise off the ground to make it easier to get out of—the back pushes up and the chair tilts forward so that one is left virtually standing by the time it is finished its thing, and it remains in that position until one returns to sit in it.

I don't know if I've written about this previously, but my grandfather had a run of very bad luck with regard to his health over this past summer (summer 2007). He suffered a heart attack while he was driving (and took out a bus stop near his home). While he was hospitalized, he wound up having, and I'm not certain of the order of these events so I'll just lump them all together, another minor heart attack, a massive coronary, and a major brain hemorrhage (a/k/a a major stroke). The stroke left him unable to speak and unable to use the right side of his body, although he has begun to recover somewhat from that.

It was a real shock seeing my grandfather. He looked frail, and if there was one thing one never would say about my grandfather was that he looked frail. He's now 86 years old, and will be turning (should he survive so long) 87 come April. He can't hear out of his right ear, so he has to turn his face so that his left ear is facing you while you're talking to him. That's from the stroke.

The train will be pulling into Grand Central Terminal in a few moments; I'm emotionally drained, which, along with my depression has left me physically drained. I don't think I could really write much more anyway.

My sister, my grandfather, my mother, my niece, and me. Happy, happy, joy, joy....

For my Gather friends, here's a link back to the article so you can return to comment and receive your points.

05 January, 2008


You can make more friends in two months by becoming interested in other people than you can in two years by trying to get other people interested in you.
~ Dale Carnegie (1888-1954),
American author and lecturer

04 January, 2008


If you really do put a small value upon yourself, rest assured that the world will not raise your price.

A New Beginning, A New Direction

Well, it's official.

I did it.

I'm so anxious right now that I'm shaking. And I'm about to s**t my pants!

What, what, you're asking, what is it already?

Well, I sent a letter (via email) to the law school that I attended but was unable, due to my depression, to complete my studies. At the time, however, I didn't know that I had depression. Hell, I didn't even know what depression was or even that it existed.

But now, after a few years of therapy, some psychiatric hospitalizations, and the like, I know about depression. In fact, I know quite a bit about depression.

And I have a much better handle on my own depression. I know how it affects me. And I've gotten better at managing it.

I know that I have to remain in treatment. I know that I have to take my medications. And I'm doing my best to do both of these things. I have a treatment team that knows mjy situation and is flexible and willing to work with me.

I know that if this works and I'm accepted back to school I'll have to do so as a first-day student, as none of my prior work will count (ABA rules dictate that when one is out of school for more than one year then one must start their studies over from day one and all prior studies are not to be taken into consideration).

Here's the e-mail that I sent out. Wish me luck!!!!!

4 January, 2008

William D. Perez
Assistant Dean for Admissions & Financial Aid
New York Law School
Office of Admissions and Financial Aid
57 Worth Street
New York, NY 10013

Dear Assistant Dean Perez:

I am a former student of NYLS (attendance dates: Fall 1994-Spring 1997) and was unable to complete my studies due to what I now know was severe and persistent depression. Although considered disabled, I now feel that I am ready and able to once again pursue a legal education and career.

I would very much appreciate an opportunity to meet with a member of your office to discuss the possibility of my return to studies at NYLS.

As such, please provide me (via e-mail) with a few dates/times that would be convenient for your staff to meet with me regarding same. Afternoons would be best for me.

Thank you for your time and kind courtesies.

-Peter C. Frank

cc: NYLS Offices of Admissions and Financial Aid

31 December, 2007

New Year's Resolutions for 2008

I really don't know what all the fuss is about. I think that if one is going to make a resolution, one shouldn't have to wait until the New Year to do so. But as is custom and tradition, far be it from me to go against the grain (actually, it wouldn't be far from me to do so but, I digress....).

So keeping in mind that I find the entire notion of resolutions for the coming New Year to be ridiculous and out of place, especially considering the abysmal failure rate in keeping one's new year's resolutions (maybe more people should read some articles on how to keep your new year's resolutions), here are my resolutions for the coming 2008 New Year:
  1. Eat more and Weigh less
  2. Shop more and Spend less
  3. Earn more and Work less
  4. Compute more and use less Energy
  5. Be more tolerant of Intolerance
  6. Start, then Quit Smoking
  7. Stop to Smell The Roses, then Cut and Sell them
  8. Get Drunk but don't get a hangover
  9. Help Others more but Give Less to them
  10. Keep Everything but Throw Out the Clutter
  11. Pay Off Debt with less income
  12. Get an education with no money (down)
That's all I can think of for now but I'll add more as I can think of them.

[Update 1 2007-12-31-5:14pm EDT] Leave it to the folks at The New York Times to be just as cynical about New Year's Resolutions as I am; the title of their article, Will Your Resolutions Last to February, speaks for itself. But just in case you don't quite get it, here's a little preview:
Four out of five people who make New Year’s resolutions tonight will eventually break them. In fact, a third won’t even make it to the end of January.
Oh, and for your amusement (especially if you're planning on getting as sloshed as some of my friends are), here's a little video humour to welcome in the New Year (I think one of these girls might be one of my cousins....)


For my Gather friends, return here to post comments.

24 December, 2007

Little Love Among Matchmakers - New York Times

Little Love Among Matchmakers - New York Times

It's amazing the sort of news that one can find in those "non-essential news sections" of the newspaper, e.g., Lifestyles, Culture, Theatre, Travel, Technology, Business, etc. I usually tend to avoid the "regular" sections of the newspaper, e.g., local, national, and world news, as all too often these days, the stories are just too depressing.

For instance, the last time I dared venture a look at the regular news section, the first article I came across was about the teenager who shot and killed nine people and then himself at a mall in Omaha, Nebraska. I mean, who can deal with this kind of information shoved into your face when all you're trying to do is keep abreast of current world events? It just makes my depression dovetail.

So with that in mind, I pretty much stick to the relatively less sensational and more boring sections of the paper, such as the Business, Technology, Life, Culture, Travel, and other such sections. And it is there that I came across this wonderful gem:

The online dating service Chemistry.com plans to unleash a new campaign that seeks to depict its older and larger competitor, eHarmony.com, as out of touch with mainstream American values. The ads, which will appear in weekly newspapers and magazines starting Monday, attack eHarmony for refusing to match people of the same gender and for the evangelical Christian beliefs of its founder, Dr. Neil Clark Warren.

Ah, how sweet the melody of this musical reporting. I've always held that eHarmony.com's refusal to match couples of the same gender, e.g., gay/lesbian couples, was a choice they made on their part. I've lost my records on this via theft but when they first came out and I contacted them as to why they didn't offer gay/lesbian matching, their response was that the research of their founder, Dr. Warren, was targeted specifically at heterosexual couples and he had done no research as to homosexual couples and therefore they couldn't offer such services, or something along those lines.

Well, what a load of malarkey if ever one were to be had! As if what gay/lesbian couples seek in a relationship is so different from that which hetero couples seek. If one is seeking a relationship, I believe that the aspects of one's personality that these sites use to match users with others will basically be the same.

The eHarmony.com's response as to why they don't match couples has changed over time. Now, according to the article, this is what they're saying:

“EHarmony’s matching system is based on psychological data collected from heterosexual married couples, and we have not offered a service for those seeking same-sex matches. Nothing precludes us from offering a same-sex service in the future, but it’s not a service we offer now.”

Bingo, bango, mingo, mango (or however that goes)! They've basically come out and said it now. It's not that they can't do it, it's that they choose not to do it. And why do they choose not to offer their services to gays and lesbians? Probably because of the evangelical religious beliefs held by their founder (this is my opinion, in any event).

So way to go, chemistry.com; I'm hoping that you'll draw tons of eHarmony's subscribers away from them. I recently had a friend disclose to me that she subscribed to eHarmony's services. When I told her that they refused to offer their matching services to gay/lesbian individuals, she told me that she would drop her membership in protest and demand a full refund.

Now, with chemistry.com's aggressive advertising campaign to set it as the leader in matching services for all individuals who desire a relationship, she has another route to follow. And so, hopefully, does everybody else who doesn't feel like being chastised for not adhering to the evangelical christian beliefs to which eHarmony.com subscribes.

18 December, 2007

The NYTimes on Google v. Microsoft (a brief overview)

The New York Times just sent an interesting article to my Inbox. Here's a paragraph from the article that, I believe, explains fairly well its gravamen:

The growing confrontation between Google and Microsoft promises to be an epic business battle. It is likely to shape the prosperity and progress of both companies, and also inform how consumers and corporations work, shop, communicate and go about their digital lives. Google sees all of this happening on remote servers in faraway data centers, accessible over the Web by an array of wired and wireless devices — a setup known as cloud computing. Microsoft sees a Web future as well, but one whose center of gravity remains firmly tethered to its desktop PC software. Therein lies the conflict.

There have been a number of articles online about the growing battle between Microsoft and Google--David (Google) taking on Goliath Microsoft). One of the odd things about this analogy is that Google is described as being a David when it is anything BUT. Granted, they're not the evil corporate empire that Microsoft has become, and hopefully they never will get there.

What is interesting to me is the manner in which Google is battling Microsoft. They're not exactly using what most would consider to be "white gloves" tactics; they're playing just as down and dirty as the rest of corporate America. The difference here, however, is in the goals that Google seeks to reach, and that they haven't to date gotten too "down and dirty."

Considering that Microsoft and Google both offer a number of competitive, comparative products, and that people tend to have preferences, which do you prefer, and why?

I believe my preference is fairly obvious but in case it isn't: I'm definitely a fan of Google, in large part because Google has--again, to date--used its clout and resources in order to comply with its corporate philosophy to "Don't Do Evil" and not only have they managed to not do evil, but they're aiding and abetting others in who battle evil. For instance,

The fact that Google's actions have traditional analysts, such as Scott Cleland, all up in stitches is, to me, definitely a good sign. It seems that American corporations have become all too obsessed with the almighty dollar, with turning profit, and have all but forgotten the basis (and most important part) of their business in the first place: the customer. Thankfully, that fate has not yet befallen Google, and I hope that Google's Corporate Philosophy (which is rumoured to have been incorporated into their by-laws) will enable them never to fall prey to that trap.

Google provides services that the customer wants, and for a reasonable price. In doing so, they have become one of the largest and most successful global companies in the history of business. Even though they charge pennies to the dollar that other corporations, such as Microsoft, charge their customers, Google is experiencing exponential revenue growth. And I firmly believe that it all has to do with their corporate philosophy. This is something that people want and, as more and more people around the world come to terms with technology and are better able to access it, I believe (and hope) that Google will be the winner of this battle.

For another take (or perhaps a similar one; I just spotted the article) take on this battle of the giants, take a look at this C|Net article.

[Updated 18 December 2007, 5:45am]:

I had to put this update in, I just found on the web, because this further exemplifies why Google is, by far, my company of choice for all things Web. David Berlind, Executive Editor of ZDNet, recently blogged about some of the recent changes that have occurred with Gmail, Google's (primarily) web-based email service, and when you read his blog post, you'll find out why I have "primarily" in parenthesis. Here are some excerpts from his post:

One of Google’s core philosophies is that user data should never be held hostage. We want people to be able to take their data and do whatever it is they want with it. This isn’t something that’s really standard for e-mail services. Particularly Web mail services that rely on ad revenue. There’s a risk if you let people get their mail in Outlook or some other client that they’ll stop using the Web interface and they’ll end up just reading their mail in a desktop client. We believe that if we give users the best possible product and if we create a good Web interface, and let them use their data in these clients like Outlook or like their BlackBerry, that they’ll overall have a better experience and be happier with the product. So, we’ve made a point throughout Gmail’s history to give people this freedom with their data.

. . .

Regarding the updates to the underlying Javascript engine, Coleman talks about how, as a result of those changes, not only has the Gmail team been able to add eight new features in as many weeks (colored labels [mentioned above], keyboard shortcuts, instantly opening e-mails [via prefetching], integration of AOL Instant Messaging, group chat, etc.), but about how the pace of change will be very fast which means a great many more enhancements (barring foldering capabilities, none of which Coleman would let slip in the interview) are coming Gmail’s way (some experimental, some not). However, one feature that’s here now, that Coleman did slip-in, is that the storage limit for users of Gmail currently exceeds 5 gigabytes. [emphasis supplied]

I just checked my Gmail account and, sure enough, I have nearly 6GB of storage space that's being provided for me. How neat is this?

17 December, 2007

AIM and Gmail Integration

Gmail (Google's free web-based email service that offers tons of storage) has just introduced AIM integration into its chat feature. Provided that you're able to access Gmail with chat enabled (at the bottom of your Gmail screen, make sure you're using the Standard view), users can now sign into AOL Instant Messenger and chat with all of their AIM buddies right from within their Gmail window.

This is totally awesome news for me. I no longer have to launch AIM just to chat with a few people who I haven't convinced to use Gmail (stubborn, they are at that!). And this means that I'll basically havce another 75kb or so of free memory to run other applicatoins on my system.

The only hitch, and it's a very small one at that, is that you'll need to have an AIM account separately from Gmail in order to use this new feature. If you're an old AOL user or you have an AIM account, that's great; if not, just go over to AOL Instant Messenger and create one--it's totally free!

Here's a the announcement from Google's Press Release:


December 4, 2007

Now chat with your AIM buddies inside Gmail

In February 2006, we integrated real-time chat into the GmailTM email service. Our goal was to let users switch between email and instant messaging without having to think about which they were using -- we even kept a history of chats and emails together in conversation threads so you could view and search both without worrying about whether your conversation happened as an email or a chat session.

But we know many of our users also have friends who use other chat services such as AIM.

So today we're rolling out a new feature to make it even more convenient and useful to chat from Gmail: you can now chat with all your AIM buddies right inside Gmail. Just click on the upside-down triangle next to "set status here" in your Gmail chat and select "Sign into AIM" from the drop down menu. Once you've entered your AIM log-in information, your AIM contacts will appear intermingled among your Gmail contacts, and you can select an AIM contact and chat with them directly.

This is just one of the first new features we're able to launch using Gmail's new code structure. This is rolling out in the newest English version of Gmail first and will be available in other languages soon. We're always looking for new and useful ways to help our users connect with friends, family, and coworkers, and we look forward to your feedback.

For more information or to start chatting, just log in to Gmail at www.gmail.com.

And be sure to check the Gmail Help Center for assistance with this great new feature, including instructions on logging into and out of AIM via Gmail.

Needless to say, I was pleasantly surprised when I discovered this ability this morning. :)

16 December, 2007

Pandora radio from the Music Genome Project

It is said that music truly is the universal language; perhaps there is truth to this statement because music is both mathematical (and we all know math to be a universal language) and emotional at the same time.

Case in point: I was listening a new station on Pandora.com (clicking on this link brings you to my profile page on Pandora). Pandora is the free Internet radio service where

  • you can create your own station by naming just one/song artist, and Pandora will use the Music Genome Project to discover related works that it think you might like,
  • you can vote individuals songs and artists into/out of your stations,
  • you can create an unlimited number of stations,
  • you can share your stations with your friends and the rest of the world,
  • you can see who else is listening to any particular song/artist at the moment,
  • you can get information about the currently playing song/artist/album with one simple click,
  • while Pandora goes about playing new content it thinks you might like, you can purchase the song from iTunes or Amazon.com, as it's playing, right from the Pandora interface), and
  • where you can do all of the above completely free of charge (except for purchasing the music from iTunes or Amazon)

I called my new station "The Crooners Station." As you may have guessed, I set up the station to play all of the great oldies from the greatest Crooners--both male and female--that America had to offer: Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Billie Holiday, and Bette Midler.

So I was pleasantly surprised when my new station played Barbra Streisand's People. I haven't heard this song in such a long time and, as always is the case with Babs, it was sung with such flawless execution and heartfelt emotion that I'm glad I wasn't in public because I was basically falling apart at the seams, overwrought with emotion. And how great is a radio station where you tell it that you like Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Billie Holiday, and Bette Midler, and it's able to determine that there's a good chance you'll like Barbra Streisand, Fred Astaire, Perry Como, Ella Fitzgerald, and Peggy Lee?

This is one of the many songs that's able to do this to me and it got me to thinking: are there any songs out there that hold a significant emotional value for you? Over songs do you end up coming apart at the seams? Post a comment and let me know which music takes you on that emotional rollercoaster we all so desperately want to avoid 99% of the time.

And as I'm writing this, another of Babs' songs is coming on that's bringing tears to my ears (I just made that up--whaddya think, tears for your ears?): Somewhere (Live from her The Concert - Act 1 double- CD set. And what was just as moving as Babs' singing was the statement that she made reflecting her views on diversity and equality (how the world would be such a boring place if we were all the same, how we should all embrace each otehr's differences but be treated equally, etc.), before she blossomed into song.

So head on over and give Pandora a listen; if you enjoy listening to music, I'm confident that you'll find something to suit your tastes there. And while you're there, check out my profile and see the stations I've created. And let me know if you create any stations so I can check out your musical tastes, as well!