Disposing of the old personnal things is a hard thing to do. You just don't want to toss stuff like that in the garbage along with the kitchen scraps. Let me suggest that you think about what we did. We went through the papers,etc. to make sure that there wasn't anything there that might be important like stock certificates or hidden money, (and there was!) and then we built a small fire in the back yard and burnt everything like that. We also burnt worn out books and stacks of old religious tracts and Sunday School leasons. Snapshots of people that we did not know was another thing that went. My mother had even saved some of my old baby stuff. Well, if you want to get technical, she was one of those that save a lot of things that would never be needed. They were all burnt. One of our local churches provides furniture, dishes and other household things for people that have fallen on hard times. I called them and told them that they could have anything they wanted in the house....but they had to TAKE EVERYTHING and dispose of it somehow. That's what they did. When they finished, the house was stripped and all we had to do was clean and sell it. They got three bedrooms of furniture, refrigerator, washer, tables, lamps and even pictures from the walls. I could not have begun to handle it without them. That's one way of solving the problem. Maybe something like that would work for you.

Allison - wine mentor? What a cool job that would be. I don't know. I've been drinking wine for years and ask questions all the time. Now that I'm selling it I end up answering a few questions too, but my suggestion is to read and taste. And if you ever get out to NYC, call me. That's serious incidentally. Anyway, I can offer a few suggestions for people. First, don't overlook Beaujolais. It's been producing wine for centuries, mostly for cafes around Lyon, where there were a number of silk merchants. They make a young wine for drinking within a few months and back in the 80s a couple British guys were drinking and made a bet with each other about which one could get the wine to London fastest. That set off a trend for about 10 - 20 years and increased sales of that young Beaujolais. Production shot up and a lot of second rate wine was made to cash in. Then the fad faded, the market crashed, and the area is suffering today. BUT - in the hills around Beaujolais they also have what are called "cru" sites and those are very much worth investigating. For education, bypass the young stuff and look for the crus - they will have a name like Fleurie, Julianas, Morgon, Moulon au Vent, Regnie, or something like that. This area is just south of Burgundy, and some of the winemakers in Burgundy work in both places and you can learn a lot and have fun. Find a producer, say Chermette, or Brun, for example, and sample the wine of the same producer from Fleurie, Morgon and Julianas. Even buy George Dubeouf wines from those places - they are great values and will show you the differences in the soils and environment and microclimates, which the French call "terroir". Because it is the same winemaking, you take that variable out of the equation and presumably taste only the differences that result from the terroir. It's a good lesson and the wine is wonderful, inexpensive, and not high in alcohol. And even try the young Beaujolais just to compare. As a rule it will be simpler, but quite nice. If you can start to understand those, you start to understand what people get excited about when they talk of Burgundy or Piedmont. You can do it with riesling too - they pretty much never use oak barrels in Germany for the rieslings, so you only taste the winemaker and the vineyard. For example, find some Prum - J.J. Prum, S.A. Prum, Weins Prum. They are related family and they make wine from the same vineyard. You can learn about the differences in winemaking. Or or St Urbans Hof and Zillikin who both use the Ockfener Bockstein vineyard and who are probably cheaper than the Prums. Or find a producer who uses multiple vineyards, like St Urbans Hof again, and try their Ockfener Bockstein vs their wine from Piesporter Goldtropfchen, looking at the same winemaker but different vineyards. Try to find Kabinett wines and don't mix Kabinett and Spatlese, etc., for this study, because the sugar will through you off. Write down the differences between the wines that you observe. You can do it in CA too - Andy Beckstoffer owns vineyards that produce really great wines, but those are going to be much more costly than those rieslings are. Schrader for example, is one of many people making wine from the Tokalon property, but you're talking $100 a bottle. The Prums have had their vineyards for years, maybe centuries. Beckstoffer moved to CA from Virginia, bought property, and sells his grapes at a price based on what the winery is going to charge for the wine! So those CA wineries, being pretty new and only recently opened by guys who became millionaires somewhere else and who paid $200,000 and acre, or else whatever Beckstoffer wants per ton, charge a lot of money for their wines, whereas Prum can sell a wine for $26 or less. I love the idea of Two Buck Chuck, but the wine isn't so great IMO. I'd rather pay another dollar and get a better wine and I think they could do it. What you won't have however, is the distinction you get from the other wines I suggested. That's because it is designed specifically NOT to have it. The idea is to create consistency, not personality. Again, no problem here and more power to him, but for me it would be boring to drink the same thing all the time, and I collect wine specifically to have variety. In 2005, the cabernet sauvignon harvest in Napa was pretty big and pretty good. People thinned the crop several times in some vineyards but the grape clusters were large so they still got more tonnage per acre than they normally do, although the wines are top notch anyhow. Prices? Not going anywhere good as far as I can see. As long as wines are selling for $100 and up, the prices aren't coming down. And about that thinning - in France and other regions, there are often regulations regarding yield per acre. They think that if you cut some young grape bunches off, called "green harvesting", the remaining ones will be more concentrated. That's becoming a basic tenet of winemaking. But there is some evidence and some opinion that this is BS. The concept was developed before there were adequate ways to measure. So a long time ago in France they thought they could improve quality by limiting yield. But maybe that's artificial, as illustrated by the 2005 vintage in CA. In a nice warm year, with adequate rain and no heat and healthy vines, the plants just might want to produce a little more with no drop in quality. In 1997 and 2005, that happened in Napa. If one were only to go by yield, we would have less wine but in fact, there was no reason to reduce production since the quality is fine. But as long as people are willing to pay, others will produce wine at $100 and up. In much of France today, they are trying to reduce production to keep prices high. You can figure out the economics of that, but IMO the idea is flawed because the competition is not simply air, it is wine from elsewhere. So if I can't buy or afford French wine, I'll buy Australian wine or Spanish or Chilean. It's a huge generalization and not 100% true, but you might say that in Napa the high prices are the result of extraordinary entry costs while in Bordeaux or Burgundy or Champagne, they are the result of production decisions designed to keep prices high. Again, that's not entirely true but its a shorthand explanation. So you look for areas like Beaujolais, Cotes du Ventoux, Cotes du Rhone, Languedoc in France, or the Rhine in Germany, or Umbira and Puglia in Italy, or Paso Robles or Mendocino in CA, or Walla Walla or Columbia Valley in WA and you can find much better deals. Or look at Argentina - some nice stuff coming out of there. And in the Texas Hill Country, they're working and in Arizona and in other states as well. Some people disparage those wines, but the people have to start somewhere. I used to disparage the wines from Michigan. Then I tried some. Taught me a lesson. I only knew the cheap sugary stuff but there are now some serious producers making good whites on the west of the state. Also in Ohio there are one or two - Kincaid makes really nice cabs down near Kentucky. I would never have believed it if I hadn't tried them. And in fact, they were in some pretty stiff competition - I had them at a dinner with people who brought some serious wine to the table and brought these just to educate us. So if someone is open minded, there is no reason to listen to wine snobs and you can find some great values out there, that are interesting, complex, and even educational if you care to go that way. Cheers all.

I'm sorry to tell you these things, but I think he's a dangerous person to be around and I would not have him visiting in my home. He's already hurting people but masks it by the silly-factor. But he's hurting them just like he hurt you. That was not funny! :( I think the age difference in itself is a huge concern, this is not a healthy relationship in any way. Maybe she likes to feel needed and he needs a mother (although probably more so just want someone to take advantage of), and maybe it makes her feel young and attractive that a young stud wants HER! But this is supposed to be an upcoming marriage, not an adoption of a troubled child. Ask her if she really believes in her heart that he will be a great husband in the long run, and will be there for her, supporting her and protecting, helping her in daily life and when life gets rough (he isn't, even now...) And will he be a fantastic father of her children, loving and protecting them, be a strong role model, guide, teacher of good and bad, give them healthy boundaries, help them grow up and mature to one day be responsible, healthy, independent adults? I don't think so. Definitely try to help her, but realize she may or may not listen. Some women (and men) will go ahead and make a poor choice even with all the warnings in the world. This marriage (if it happens) will not end well. I personally know so many who were warned not to marry a certain person, did it anyway, and have had nothing but problems. See if you can get her to read 10 stupid things women do to mess up their lives by Dr. Laura Schlessinger, that might open her eyes to the danger of what's she's doing. It may be all cute to her now, but later on she'll need a MAN. This guy is a boy at best. A predator, perhaps (probably). I'm very sorry, and I hate telling you these things because I know it will make your heart hurt so badly! I'd love to give you reassurance that it will be just fine. But I think you already know. So now, just work at reaching her. Definitely try your best to help her see that a huge life decision such as a marriage is worth pushing back to make sure she's making the right decision. Hopefully in that time she'll realize the mistake of being with him. All the best to you and your daughter!!! (((HUG)))

Was blown away by Selma Hayek's article. To have a meaningful discussion we need to differentiate between rape, sexual assault, and harassment. Hayek DID say no, repeatedly, and did fight against Weinstein. But he continued to bully her in a sexual way, which is harassment. And he got away with it because of the power he wielded in her industry and a lack of an accountability force in his work. Weinstein seems to fit standard psychopath behaviors--charming and charismatic on the surface, good at manipulating people, gets a kick out of pushing boundaries, and has the inability to ever respect them because to respect social boundaries you have to be able to empathize with your fellow humans. The golden rule of how to treat people which is totally logical, makes no sense if you cannot imagine an "other" as being anything outside of an object. And that goes for the way psychopaths treat both men and women. Psychopaths are not all Hannibal Lecter's, many are highly functioning and respected members of our society, due to their charm and for some, intelligence. And many do not "mean" to harm people and can be taught to treat people well, but in a mechanistic way. But by the time someone is in the position of Weinstein, too many people are invested so it will take a "village" so to speak, to hold them accountable. It takes quite a while for enough people to understand how twisted the person is, because if you have never seen it or experienced it in person, based on the person's outside face, you find it unbelievable. They can hold it together for a while and say just the right things to gain sympathy and positive attention. Ask me how I know . . . Years ago I had a very weird boss, who everyone thought was a saint but could be casually cruel just as easily as casually eloquent and charming. He would mouth the words about how we were all one big family and folks would believe him . . . until they experienced his dark side. One of the people who worked with him told me once, "I used to think he was a great guy and my friend, and then I realized he was NOT a great guy, and NOT my friend, and the only person he cared about was himself." But hard to pin anything on him since so many folks practically worshiped him.