Thursday, March 1, 2012

A Word to the Wise: Debris

Remember that scene in “The Graduate” when Benjamin Braddock, played by Dustin Hoffman, has just returned home from graduating college and his parents threw him a party attended by all their friends?  This is of course the set up for the infamous affair between Benjamin and Mrs. Robinson, the wife of one of his dad’s friends, played ever so lasciviously by Anne Bancroft.   

But I digress.

At the party, Benjamin’s dad’s friends each take their turns offering advice to the graduate, no doubt sincerely hoping to steer him toward success.  One of those well-wishers corners Benjamin near the pool and with drink in hand, sways forward and says, “I’ve got just one word for you….”  Dramatic pause.  Tension.  Benjamin leans in, waiting.  What’s the word?  “Plastics.” 

A beat, as they say in screenplay speak.  Benjamin’s blank stare tells all.  The import of the message is lost on our obtuse friend.  Clearly, Benjamin will fail to take advantage of the insider advice to invest in plastics.  Indeed, where might each of us be today if we’d heeded that advice ourselves back in 1967? 

I offer this as a cautionary tale for folks who may not at first divine the value of today’s headlines and their future impact.  I’ve got one word for you.  Make note.  Here it is:  Debris.

I’m no insider, but I can see the flotsam on the water, the jetsam in the sky, and the graffiti on the wall.  Debris looms.  We can line up with Chicken Little, or prepare now to exploit it.  

To wit:  A giant field of floating debris slides across the middle of the Pacific Ocean.  Yes, an island of garbage twice the size of Texas, comprised of more than 300,000 cars, boats, buildings, refrigerators, lumber, furniture, futons, and Frisbees is drifting toward us in the aftermath of the Japanese tsunami.  For perspective, consider that US Navy ships have to steer clear of this isle of refuse!  And it's moving faster than scientists expected it would. Ocean currents could sweep it onto the West Coast by next year. 

Add to that the fact that the great beltway above our heads is awash with the wreckage of spent satellites and the deceased carcasses of redundant rocket boosters.  That’s right.  NASA scientists report that twenty-two thousand objects large enough to track from earth circle ominously above us, along with countless chunks of space rubble sizeable enough to put a dent in the dome of the cavalier.  In an intergalactic counterpart to the aforementioned ocean-going vessels, the International Space Station has to maneuver around this cosmic clutter!  What’s more, the junk is beginning to wobble, leave orbit, and fall to earth.  

But even though the tide seems to have turned and the sky is in fact falling, the astute can position themselves now to make a wad o’ cash on the trash that’s headed our way.  The word indeed is debris.

Some will no doubt scoff.  “Debris!?” they’ll say.  “What falderal!  Why I might as well put my money on Barak Obama!”  As you wish, oh skeptics, and doubters, and all ye of little faith.  Just don’t say I didn’t tell you.

Who’s most likely to capitalize on the imminent influx of rubble?  The pragmatic.  The no-nonsense, logical, realistic, roll-up-your-sleeves, down-to-earth dynamos.  Action-oriented achievers:  Storage warriors, American Pickers, and hoarders of all ilk can convert the sows ears we’re about to be showered with into silk purses of every amalgamation.  Those “design on a dime” folks can count this as a windfall, scavenging for the shabby chic and turning tsunami trash into treasure.  
Mothers of teenage sons are uniquely qualified to work the frontlines at landfall.  They stand poised with the proficiencies required to turn tons of twaddle into masses of moola.  They are after all adept at collecting, categorizing, cleaning, and creating utility out of chaos.  They can already hold their breaths for extended periods of time while sorting and typing items of value unrecognizable to the childless and uninitiated.   

As for me, I’m putting my money in cranes, bulldozers, landfills, recycling plants, and alternative energy.  Or, envisioning a giant bonfire along the 800-mile California coast, one might make money in hotdogs and s’mores. 

Oh yes, there's a buck to be made in debris.  Just remember the word and where you heard it first.  
Act now to avoid disappointment and future regret.

Thursday, February 23, 2012

Six Degrees of Oscar

Let me just start out by saying we need a better method for selecting Best Picture.  The criteria used by members of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts & Sciences for deciding which movie gets Best Picture are esoteric, at most.  Who are these guys, the Academy members, and how do they decide which picture is “best”? 

It’s a little too hush, hush for me.  According to NBC News’s stealth research team, 94% of Academy members are white, 77% are male, 2% are black, and less than 2% are Latino.  Who do they think they are, the United States Congress?! 

When you go to the Academy’s official website, they just shine you on.  For example, if you’d like to find out for yourself who comprises the 6,000 voting members of the Academy, the website cryptically offers “a short list of individuals from each branch.”   

Well!  I wonder why we all don’t step forward.  I just want to know who picked “Rocky” over “All the President’s Men” and “Taxi Driver.”  How did you decide on “How Green is My Valley” over “Citizen Kane”?  Really.  Come on!  Show yourselves!  

The Academy says of its members that they number among “the most gifted and skilled artists and craftsmen in the motion picture world.”  Isn’t that nice?  Their site goes on to say that “its Award stands alone as a symbol of superior achievement.” 

All right.  Maybe if we, the movie going public, the fans, the unskilled, uneducated out crowd could identify who the Academy’s in crowd is, we would be pestering them to vote for our favorite picture, the one we chose because it made us cry, or made us laugh and cry, or starred our pet actor, you know, that hunky guy who’s still single.  Of course, we have the People’s Choice Awards for this purpose.  They’re terrible.  Point taken. 

But the Academy acknowledges its own internal lobbying: “Each November, an election campaign commences that rivals, at least in Hollywood, the passions and sometimes the excesses of the quadrennial race for the nation’s presidency.  It’s the race for the Academy Award nomination.”  Imagine the hardships voting members must endure - special screenings of nominated films, free admission to commercial runs of films, and the mailing of DVDs. Oh, the humanity.   

All Academy members, whoever they are, can vote for Best Picture.  And what are their criteria for selecting the “best”?  No mention of this on the Academy’s website.  We can only assume that each member has his or her own private yardstick of cherished elements.  For example, I like a thought-provoking movie with a touch of the supernatural.  “Michael Clayton” comes to mind, or “Crash.”  With no stated standards of excellence, maybe Academy members are the ones who choose the movie that made them sniffle, or giggle ‘til they dampened their drawers.  In an information vacuum, we can only surmise. 

As it is we’re supposed to accept the wisdom of that elite cadre of shadowy figures who foisted “Shakespeare in Love” on us when “Saving Private Ryan” was in the mix.  These are the same folks who held up “Ordinary People” in place of “Raging Bull,” and “Chariots of Fire” over “On Golden Pond.”  Seriously.  Which of those “winners” have lived longer in your memory? 

Therefore, in the spirit of “Moneyball,” I propose another, more scientific method for determining Best Picture.  No more voter subjectivity.  No more gut feelings or sentimentality.  Be gone Academy politics!  Let’s just get down to the numbers: 

The Oscar for Best Picture goes to the movie that can get you to Kevin Bacon in the fewest steps.  

You know how it works, right, Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon?  For example, begin with Patrick Swayze in “Road House” and go to Patrick Swayze and Demi Moore in “Ghost.”  Then from Demi in “Ghost” go to Demi in “A Few Good Men” - with Kevin Bacon.  Three degrees.  

Clean, transparent!  No funny business.  No hokey pokey.  Just connect the dots.  

The down side is that by this standard, “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close” wins with a direct link:  Tom Hanks in “EL&IC” straight to Tom Hanks and Kevin Bacon in “Apollo 13.”  Voila!  Done and done.  The A’s win the pennant and a new Hollywood tradition is born. 

OK.  You’re right.  It’s not very romantic.  Yes, I do like a little romance in my movies.  And a little mystery in the process.   

Darn!

Thursday, February 16, 2012

Dirty Deeds Done Digitally

My grandma told me it’s better to be the dump-er than the dumpee.  She was a pretty smart old broad.  She lived her life.  And while she didn’t spell out the details of her quest for love between marriages to my grandpa (that’s right; she married him twice), she did make me the gift of excellent advice when I was evaluating suitors in the meat markets of my youth. 

These days, in absence of wisdom handed from generation to generation, we have new websites and applications offering dumpees a chance to get constructive feedback from the dumpers who, well, dumped them.  Nice.  I just can’t help thinking of AC/DC’s “Dirty Deeds, Done Dirt Cheap.” 

But maybe it’s not a bad idea.  After all, 20% of new relationships now begin online.  Why not end ‘em there?  Or at least do a virtual mop up of the digital mess. 

I’m old school enough to say some things simply must be done in person.  But what if you’re the dumpee and the dumper doesn’t want to talk to you?  Or if you’re the dumper and the dumpee doesn’t want to listen?  Stepping in to fill the void of courage and good breeding is a new website: “WotWentWrong.”  

The idea with WotWentWrong is that after a first date has failed to produce a follow-up phone call, or budding love shriveled without explanation, dumpees can fill out an online questionnaire detailing what they feel they must know from the dumper – such as ‘Was it my teeth?  My nervous giggle and tic?  Did I talk too much about my gerbil?’  They submit their questions to the website which acts as an intermediary between the star-crossed ex-would-be-lovers.  The dumper responds through the site, avoiding direct contact with the person he or she unceremoniously unloaded.   

WWW even offers a schematic for the process:  Step one comprises a healthy-sounding ‘Proactively Seek Feedback’ (ask where things went wrong); and step two, ‘Be Honest but Respectful’ (give constructive feedback); and concludes with a smiling graphic step three, ‘Look to the Future,’ (develop insights and behaviors to ensure your relationship goals).  Ah!  Sweet Mystery of Life, resolved at last with three clicks of a mouse and a la di dah. 

Other sites related to state-of-the-psyche matchmaking and breaking offer the jilted not peace of mind, but revenge.  Consider CheaterVille, for example, where you can “Fight infidelity!  Post a known cheater now!”  Mug shots and unseemly tales of he-done-me-wrong provide enough degrading dirt to eliminate the need to watch “Maury” for the remainder of the decade.  

Or what about NeverLikedItAnyway, where dumpees can sell off gifts from their exes including engagement rings and wedding gowns.  Here the seller takes glee in downgrading the accoutrement of a withering romance, if not the dumper directly. 

I can’t help thinking of all the ways things could go wrong on such a site, especially with the help of a mischievous nerd with a penchant for misdirection.  Remember the cleric in “Romeo and Juliet” who never delivered the message that would have saved the day?  No?  Well he really messed things up.   

The modern day equivalent, say a hybrid of Allstate’s anarchist, “Mayhem,” and an “Anonymous” hacker, could wreak virtual chaos.  Your cheater might wind up with my cut-rate diamond ring; and we’ve facilitated a perpetrator in committing another crime of the heart!  Oh dash it all! 

Of course technology is already forging the solution to such dilemmas:  Virtual assistants; Artificial Intelligence.  The newest wave of hi-tech gadgets uses voice pattern recognition to determine how likely their users are to attend a first date before scheduling it, or how engaged a prospective Mr. Right is in the content of a conversation by analyzing his gaze and head gestures.  They can detect his mood based on his tone of voice and pacing of words. 

So, if both parties take their PDA’s to their exploratory first meeting at Peet’s, they won’t have to think at all about their prospects.  It’ll be done for them, virtually!  No muss, no fuss, no awkward actual interaction. 

In the trend to make the “human interface” even more user friendly, PDA’s should have the voice of our elders deliver the advice.  Over a latte, and from the palm of your hand, she’ll size him up and say, “Honey, you might as well throw this one back.  He’s got a drinker’s nose and he hardly held your attention anyway.” 

Thanks Grandma.

Thursday, February 9, 2012

St. Valentine's Day in the 21st Century

Having just learned the origins of Valentine’s Day can be traced all the way back to a mid-February fertility festival named for the she-wolf of Rome, I can see why a person might have conflicted feelings.  I’m not sure how much chocolate it will take to eradicate from my tender thoughts of love the image of the mother-wolf Lupa in a cave with Romulus and Remus, even though she saved their lives and they went on to found Rome itself.  OMG.

Even after that the stories wax a bit medieval.  Legend has it that Valentine, a Roman priest, defied his Emperor Claudius by continuing to marry young lovers in spite of Claudius’s wartime decree against marriage, intended to keep men on the battlefield.  Made a martyr by his imprisonment and sentence to death for his defiance, Valentine received countless gifts of roses and sweets from those whom he’d dared to wed. 

It’s said that Valentine fell in love with his jailor’s daughter.  And on the day of his execution, he sent her a note signed, “Your Valentine,” and voila!  The tradition was born of suitors dying with expressions of sweet, if unrequited love. 

We can’t impugn Valentine for our predicament today.  He couldn’t have known from that messy point forward, he’d be canonized, and the rest of us would be duty bound to spend $448 million per year to show our affections. 

Even though an element of coercion clings to the celebration of St. Valentine’s Day, I do enjoy shopping for cards for my loved ones.  Every year I browse the aisles of red and pink, collecting ever so carefully the perfect sentiments for my husband and son, my father-in-law, each of my brothers, my nieces and nephews, my cherished friends, my elderly neighbors, and my cats.  More than once I’ve gotten home and set about addressing the envelopes only to find the cards can’t have been perfect after all.  I don’t remember which one I intended for whom!  Oh well.  It’s the obligatory thought that counts.

I don’t think my husband will get me candy this year as we’ve been hiding candy since the day after Halloween.  It’s the only way not to eat what we didn’t drop into the bags of boogey men or those stockings hung by the chimney with care.  I put it out of sight, or he does.  Then we each forget where we put it.  If we’re lucky, by the time we run across it again in the hall closet or the laundry room, it’s all filmy and undesirable.  One less hour on the treadmill.

Roses are nice.  He used to send me roses at work, from a florist.  That was the best!  I was the object of envy.  Now that I’m retired, our florist is Safeway.  He carries a bouquet home in its cellophane wrap and sneaks it onto the kitchen counter.  But be clear:  I’m not complaining.  I’m blonde, but I’m not stupid.   

I wouldn’t mind a dinner out.  You know, white tablecloths, two forks.  Champagne flutes and a toast to us.  But I know him well enough after 21years to accept that he hasn’t made reservations and now there are none to be made.  All the posh eateries booked themselves full up a couple of weeks ago. 

We’ll have take-out in front of the TV.  A TiVo’d movie and a clink of soft drinks across the end table.  And you know what?  I’m looking forward to it.  He’s the greatest, really.  As his mom told me so long ago – he’s as comfortable as a pair of old shoes.

My favorite old shoes are my go-to fleece-lined boots.  They keep my toes toasty all the way up to my calves.  They’re not really made to wear outdoors, but I do sometimes, to get the paper or feed the dog.  They have a tough soul, er sole, and stand up to the elements. 

He bought them for me actually.  No surprise.  I circled a picture of them in a catalog and left it on his chair.  He took the page and ordered online.  When UPS delivered the box, he wrote on it with a Sharpie, “I love ya, Honey!”

He does.  Of that I’m certain.  And Honey, I love you too.

Happy Valentine’s Day.

Thursday, February 2, 2012

Don't You Just Hate It When That Happens?

Of course the Park Police would patrol the parking lot on the day I forget to take my park pass out of the glove box and hang it on the rear view mirror.  It’s easily 4”x10” and creates a distraction for driving, not to mention an aesthetic crime.  So I pack it away and pull it out every time I go to walk in the park.  Well, almost every time. 

I paid $90 to park on the premises for my daily hour and a half trek, when I could park on the street all day, for free.  But I felt duty bound to support the parks.  Could have paid the $6 daily fee, but that’s more expensive, and I felt proud of my official advocacy.  Now with this check, paying the fine for failure to display my parking pass, I’ll be backing them again to the tune of $71.  Gosh I feel good. 

Few things are more exasperating than a parking ticket.  Once, I inadvertently gave a parking attendant an $11 tip.  I thought I was giving him two ones.  Turns out it was a ten and a one.  I remember thinking he had an odd smile when I handed him the bills.  He knew.  I didn’t find out until later when I reached for the ten and it wasn’t there.  Then I was the one who had the odd look.  I wouldn’t call it a smile though.   

I ran into a former student working at Sport Mart once.  She had grown up so much in the few years since I’d seen her!  We chatted over the cushioned insoles I needed for those aforementioned walks in the park.  She seemed very knowledgeable about the products on display and I left the store with a pricey pair of inserts, happy, anticipating cushy comfort on my next perambulation.   

I crossed the bridge, dashed into the house, and went directly to my walking shoes to put my new hi-tech insoles in place, only to find they were tiny.  I thought they were the one-size-fits-all/trim-to-fit-the-masses type of shoe insert.  But my size 9.5 clodhoppers engulfed those petite pillows.  I could hang ten.  I made a detailed search of the packaging and a squinty-eyed second scan before I found the sizing information printed on the upper right-hand corner in a font suitable for the head of a pin.   

Why my sweet, smart former student hadn’t thought to mention sizing to me remains a mystery, unless I take into account her pronounced scatter-brainedness from our past association.  That was irritating. 

A while ago my friend and I went to the indie theatre to see a 2:30pm showing of the quirky and acclaimed film “Garden State,” only to find that it had started at 2:05pm.  The teenager in the ticket booth shrugged, “Oh, sorry, the paper must have been wrong.”  We watched “Jane Eyre” instead, a dark and brooding period piece of unrequited love.  It was so true to the book. 

A recurring aggravation is the trend at supermarkets to shuffle the locations of their groceries.  It felt like I was in the Hunt for Red October recently, desperately seeking my favorite granola.  I can think of no defensible reason why the cereal aisle should be moved from the back-right of the store to front-left.  What’s the logic in putting the Cheerios next to the cheese?  Unless of course you’re into alliteration.   

Come to think of it, alphabetizing would be more helpful than the obscure marketing schemes that put the color red on virtually every package and the good stuff either too high to reach without exposing your belly, or too low to stoop for without showing your behind. 

My dentist convinced me that my teeth had become beige, instead of the bathtub porcelain white so exceedingly desirable these days.  So I bought the molded trays and peroxide gel.  But after a couple of sessions I saw patches of white on my teeth that did not blend with the ecru to which I’d become accustomed.  I didn’t want to display a patchwork of earth tones, so I quit using the stuff. 

Next time in his office, six months later, I mentioned it.  “Oh,” he said, “that’s normal.  The patches are just dry spots that come up.  But they blend in quickly.  No need to worry.  It all evens out.”  Thanks.  That’s good information to have.  Today. 

Seems that writing the check for this parking ticket brings up such maddening memories!  It’s not my habit to dwell on such things, but it appears that I have.  How exasperating! 

Don’t you just hate it when that happens?! 

Thursday, January 26, 2012

Let the Buyer Beware!

I feel like Miles Monroe, owner of the Happy Carrot Health-Food store in Woody Allen’s classic comedy/satire, “Sleeper.”  Miles lived in Manhattan in 1973; he was cryogenically frozen without his consent; awakened 200 years later, only to find that everything he knew was wrong. 

In their efforts to revive him, the 22nd century doctors who “thawed” him prescribed chocolate and cigarettes!  He refused, of course, coming from the birth of the health food mania of the 1970’s.  But they assured him that the latest scientific research proved nicotine and cocoa beans to be most healthful and rejuvenating.

So it made his abstinence seem futile.  Hmmm.   

And what about all those organic herbs, vitamin supplements, and gag-inducing blended concoctions he must have choked down in the name of well-being?  Had it all been in vain?    

Flash forward, or back to the present, or wherever we are in relation to that fictional scenario:  Reuters Health now reports that a University of Connecticut researcher who studied the link between decelerated aging and a substance found in red wine has committed 145 acts of data fabrication and falsification, throwing most of his findings into doubt.  

That’s right.  Dipak K. Das, who directed the university's Cardiovascular Research Center, studied the substance resveratrol, touted as a means to slow aging and maintain good health as people get older.  A Las Vegas resveratrol maker, Longevinex, has promoted Das's research, and he appears in a lengthy video they produced hyping the nutrient as the next aspirin - “The sliced bread of the Viagra & Botox set.”  I beg your pardon?! 

Thank heavens for the tipster who alerted UConn and the U.S. Office of Research Integrity, which investigates alleged misconduct by federal grant recipients.  They’ve in turn notified 11 journals that published Das's work, including “The Journal of Antioxidants & Redox Signaling.”  Really. 

Shocking for the world of science.  But more important for us: resveratrol in red wine is not the lost secret of eternal youth we were promised. 

Great.  That’s just great. 

Red wine won’t keep me young.  Thank you so much, Dr. Das.  I threw myself into that regimen wholeheartedly!  It’s very discouraging.  And it’s a dilemma:  Should I abstain, or not?  Will we find out next year that, oops, resveratrol really does reverse the sands of time?   

What axiom of wisdom is next to be debunked?  I’m not lankier in my flare-leg jeans?  Minimizers maximize?  They told me I’d look great, but am I just another tubby girl in a V-neck sweater and vertical stripes?!  

For years we thought a golden tan was the hallmark of glowing health.  But no.   

Public schools served grilled cheese sandwiches and tater tots to untold thousands of innocent children.  Now we’re informed that government-issued pasteurized processed “cheese food” and potatoes deep-fried in animal lard aren’t the nutritional dynamos we were led to believe.  Or are they? 

We used to be able to trust our mortgage lenders.  Yikes.  Next they’ll tell me the Nigerian National Petroleum Company isn’t going to transfer $47,000,000 into my bank account, after all. 

Of course, I kind of knew about the Nigerians, anyway.  I barely considered their proposal, though I felt for the Nigerian civil servants who emailed me, being forbidden to operate a foreign bank account and all.  That’s why they needed my help in the first place.  

My 25% of $47million?  That’s about; let’s see, by my calculations, $11million and change.  I could use that kind of dough.  But still, I’m skeptical.  Why did they pay so much for the mineral rights to begin with?  Everyone knows you get your contingencies in place before you tie up your capital! 

And it’s common knowledge that to be a legitimate transferee of such moneys according to Nigerian law, a person like me would have to be a current depositor of at least $100,000 in a Nigerian bank.  Pretty inconvenient.   

They said they’d be most grateful for my assistance, but I just don’t know anymore, now that I’m off the cabernet. 

A person can’t be too careful.  You put your faith in something only to find it reversed on appeal.  Even worse - it was fabricated and falsified from the outset.   

From now on, I’m sticking with the tried and true:  I’ll drink my sloe gin fizz, wear my most forgiving black, and keep my money in the henhouse with the eggs in a variety of baskets.  

No, no!  I won’t be fooled again.

Wednesday, January 18, 2012

You Too Can Be Charismatic!


So I’m working on my charisma.  You know - that certain something you might say some of us simply exude.  Just born with it.  Enchanting.  Captivating.  

"It's from the Greek, and it generally refers to a gift, something [a person] didn't necessarily have to earn or deserve," says Mark Oppenheimer who teaches at Yale University.  "But it's this talent, or unique capability.  It comes from the gods, really." 

As I said, I’m working on it. 

At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Media Lab, researchers say they can use science to measure charisma, assuming you have some to measure. 

With a little device they call the “Sociometer,” the creation of Professor Alex Pentland and his team at MIT, a person’s charm can be gauged.  To do this, according to Pentland, the Sociometer measures not what you say, but how you say it.   

Really?  Doesn’t matter what I say?  I’m all over this!  On my way to personal magnetism. 

"So the first thing is energy,” says Pentland in an interview on CBS.  “You have to be energetic."  

OK, if I want to be charismatic I have to be energetic.  I can be energetic.  I am so energetic.  

"It shows up in your hands,” he goes on.  “It shows up in your voice, the way you carry yourself and do things."   

Yeah!  Yeah!  I’m getting’ it!  If you could only see me.  I’m an absolute Liberace at the keyboard. 

According to the MIT team and their Sociometer, high scorers have a real advantage.  Consider what happened when Pentland used his high-tech gadget to assess charisma's impact on corporate business decisions: Without knowing anything about the business plan, [or] the person presenting it, “We predicted how well [the] plan would be rated.  And the two things that really mattered were:  Did [the presenter] sound like they were excited?  And, were they fluid in how they produced the speech?” 

That’s it!  Any animated schmo can effect a winning sales pitch so long as she doesn’t twist her tongue!  Really.  She sells seashells by the seashore. 

And get this:  Professor Joseph Nye of the Harvard Kennedy School says, though we may not like to admit it, winning personalities win elections.  "There is an attractiveness that leads some people to be able to get others to follow them by their personality." 

Oppenheimer, who also studied the subject at Yale concurs: "Most American voters ultimately don't vote on specific policy questions.  They're responding to something else - charisma."  Yikes. 

Sure enough, in a new CBS "Sunday Morning" poll, 3 out of 4 voters say that indefinable something will play a role in their vote - one in four says a major role.  It’s a good way to save time studying candidates and their positions on the issues. 

Supposedly you can be trained to be charismatic.  So, even a bumbling oaf, not to mention any names, can take classes and come out Clooney-esque.  So says John Neffinger, an Ivy League law school graduate who now runs workshops for the charismatically challenged.  He defines charisma as a combination of strength and warmth, beginning with body language.   

Just like Grandma said:  Stand up straight and smile!  Neffinger agrees, "… that is actually the basic formula.  Standing up straight says, ‘I'm here to be taken seriously.  Don't mess with me!’ and that projects strength.  Smiling genuinely projects a lot of warmth." 

The winning combination, and this is where it gets tricky, is a smile that projects both warmth and strength.  "There are two different things going on, on the face," says Neffinger.  "On the bottom half of the face is just a little bit of a smile.  So you got warmth going on the bottom.  But what goes on in the eyes is, there's an intention to the look in the eyes.  There's a determination.  And that intensity connotes strength." 

No wonder Mitt Romney looks so stiff.  He’s trying to remember all this stuff that doesn’t come naturally while fending off Newt Gingrich and Stephen Colbert.   

But with such a simple recipe, I feel certain I can work up from my current state of shy and socially inept, through the intermediate stages of awkward but well meaning, and disarmingly pushy, all the way up to mesmerizingly irresistible.   

I’m very excited about this.  Warmly, sincerely, and with strength. 

Vote for me.