Forbes: Will the recession end gold-digging? (via Hot Air):

It looks like the economic downturn is producing a dating downturn too. At least this is true in financial centers like New York, where an unhealthily intimate bond between mating and money has persisted down the decades, from Edith Wharton through Candace Bushnell.

Maybe, finally, this recession will cut that bond, or at any rate do it some damage. ...

Just as that friend didn't need the money but felt her tab should be covered anyway, a male New York friend of middling income, an academic, told me that he gave up on online dating because it just got too expensive. On every first date, he offered to pay, as he felt was expected of him; usually, he was taken up on his offer. That adds up quickly.

The author of the Forbes article suggests that women seek artists, academics, coaches and teachers instead of men who have "made income their life's goal." I recommend choosing someone you actually connect with and get along with on a number of levels, not just by his career choice. For choosing a man because of his career is about as deep as a man choosing a woman because she has a good ass. Neither one is the best way to keep a relationship going.

Go red for men!

Since today is National "Go Red" for women day, cardiologist and blogger Wes Fisher has an idea for how to include men:

And now, ladies and gentleman, completely free of commercial endorsement, I'd like to announce the Go Red for Men national campaign to raise heart disease awareness in men with a new logo, available to all, and completely free of any charge or requirement to purchase a thing.

I am glad that women are finally acknowleging heart disease, especially having had a heart attack myself. But honestly, the hype and "empowerment" mantra that goes with these types of programs for women really gets on my nerves.

Who's really selfish?

David Harsanyi has a few good questions in response to Obama's continued harping on the selfishness of CEOs:

Then again, what could possibly be more reckless than spending $1 trillion you don't have on a plan that you have no evidence will work?

What could be more irresponsible than doubling the generational debt for your partisan pet projects in a time of crisis?

And what could be more selfish than stifling debate by deploying fear to induce voters into supporting it all?

Sounds like selfishness is a trait that isn't limited to the business world.

John Hawkins at Right Wing News has a review up on Doug Feith's book War and Decision, now out in paperback.

Questions Needed

I have an upcoming PJTV show with Advice Goddess, Amy Alkon, coming up for Valentine’s Day - to be aired next week, where we will be discussing relationship issues and problems.

If you have a question concerning your relationship (or lack of one) or any other pressing concern about love, sex or marriage, please leave it in the comments or if you want more privacy, email me at askdrhelen at hotmail.com We will read some of them on the air and answer them during a segment. Thanks!

And I thought check-cashing places charged high fees...

Glenn and I subscribe to Forbes which I was reading this morning and caught an article on Tim Geithner. The article was good, but the more interesting tidbit I found was one about how debt-collection agencies are one of the winners of the stimulus package (in a highlighted box within the same article). Get a load of this:

Debt-collection agencies. They thrive on others' misfortunes, of course. They'll really love the $1 billion headed for states to help them collect child support. Nearly every state outsources deadbeat-dad services to companies like Supportkids, an Austin, Tex. firm that was recently sued by the state of Virginia for alledgedly interfering with the enforcement of child support obligations by taking 34% of the debt it collects as a fee. (The company says the suit is "the result of a lack of comunication with the state" and hopes it will be resolved before going to trial.)

Yeah, right, lack of communication. Anyway, why should the stimulus package use tax payers' money to subsidize a group of sharks like Supportkids charging outrageous fees for shaking down "deadbeat dads"? And what about deadbeat-moms of which there are many?

I propose that all the men out there who are not collecting child support from these women sign up with this company. Apparently, Supportskids is quite successful as they state:

Supportkids is the leader in non-traditional child support enforcement, providing an alternative to government agencies. With over 16 years in business, our total collections exceed $400 million. We collect over to $3.9 million every month for families all across the nation, many of whom went years without child support payments.

My guess is that dads don't try and collect from women who don't pay. But if they do, I hope they're smart enough not to pay a 34% commission.

What ever happened to ringing the dinner bell?

Reader Matt emails a story about a Memphis woman who shot her husband in the head as he was doing doughnut circles in his truck:

A Millington woman who killed her husband with a .22-caliber rifle while he made doughnut circles in his pickup truck was sentenced today to three years of probation.

As part of a negotiated sentence, Linda Abbott, 40, agreed not to ask Criminal Court Judge John Colton Jr. for diversion, which could have erased the voluntary manslaughter conviction returned by a jury in November. In return, she will do no jail time if she complies with probation requirements....

Authorities initially believed that Abbott died in a violent crash when his truck hit a piece of farm machinery and burst into flames.

When a .22-caliber bullet was found in his head during an autopsy, however, Linda Abbott admitted firing one rifle shot in the air and a second shot that she said was an accidental discharge.

Authorities said the shot traveled some 150 feet across a field behind the house, struck Gary Abbott in the head and caused the truck to crash.

She told a jury the shooting was an accident, that she was trying to get his attention to come to dinner and that she had no reason to intentionally shoot him.

My question may be naive here but should you really shoot off a gun to get your husband's attention for dinner? What happened to ringing a dinner bell?

Neo-Neocon: It's a disaster.