Adoption is NOT rescue. Madonna is mucking up the issue in the public mind. That's HER hangup, and ultimately, her mistake.

But Pamela, adoption is not rescue for the many thousands of people who adopt children -- white children, Latino children, biracial children, Chinese children, Russian children, African children -- each year.

The real reason for adoption should be because you want to be a parent to a child. Helping poverty, righting the wrongs of the world -- these are NOT reasons for adoption.

When I adopted my son from Central America, people would say "Oh, that's so good of you...what a good life you're giving him." And I felt uncomfortable about it. But I didn't adopt him as a charitable act. We were the lucky ones!

If I want to be Debbie-Do-Good, then I should send my money to charitable groups, sponsor or foster children abroad like Oprah, or take care of foster children here. I adopted because I wanted to be a mother.

Madonna does deserve some additional criticism, however, because she is also getting a very public exemption to the Malawian regulations that require 18 months in-country of observation. That is absolutely, 100% wrong. It's fine if a celeb gets a free pair of Manolo's, or gets the prime table at a hot restaurant. But they should NOT go to the head of the line, or be able to skirt international regulations, when adopting domestically or internationally. Most of us didn't have $3 million to donate...believe me, if I had it, I'd have donated it to anyone if it meant not waiting an agonizing year to bring home my son. For Madonna to jump the line and skirt the regulations is a selfish insult to the many thousands of parents who wait months and years, and spend many many days in lines at the State Dept, Homeland Security, FBI, US Embassies around the world, processing the paperwork for their legal, above-board adoptions that follow the rules of the countries where they are adopting.

But Pamela, you do have to chill a bit though. Every week on newscasts across America, you get news segments on "Wednesday's Child" or similar, presenting a child looking for a family. Orphanages regularly invite prospective families in to meet children in a group setting. Go take a look at http://www.precious.org -- a "photolisting" of children available for adoption around the world. How is this ANY different? Just because the adoptive family is white? Sorry -- but it doesn't fly.

(I'm not mad for any of those approaches, but sometimes, don't the ends justify the means? You're uniting children with families who want them...)

Come on, folks, Slut-o-ween is nothing new. Back in the far-away 70s, when I was a college student, it seemed every woman who could get away with it -- from dimwitted bimbo to mensa member -- used Halloween as an excuse to dress up as...

A PLAYBOY BUNNY!!

Every costume opportunity, there were always legions of girls in fishnets and heels, bunny outfits with tail, ear headbands, and heavily pushed-up cleavage.

At least now, for those who wish to celebrate Slut-o-ween, there are options beyond the tiresome Playboy Bunny...

Step 1. Take typical fantasy imagery items-- cleavage, heels, legs, corsets, long hair

Step 2. Add to whatever "fantasy" dressup character you can imagine.

You can be a slutty alien, a slutty corpse, a slutty witch, slutty zombie, slutty nurse, slutty queen, slutty McDonald's fry girl, slutty surgeon -- you name it!

But then, turnabout IS fair play. Given our national obsession with Johnny Depp, is it any surprise that one of the most popular costumes for men in recent years has been the dreadlocked, beaded and bescarfed swashbuckling sexy pirate?

As for me, I plan to go as something TRULY, utterly frightening this Halloween, something that is blood-curdlingly horrifying, scarier than anything, and will raise the hair on your arms like fingernails-on-a-blackboard...

I'm going as

Ann Coulter...

For showbiz folks, having the broadest possible audience usually depends on maintaining a neutral position on nearly every possible political, religious, sexual or cultural issues, and staying out of controversies of all sorts.

You "mess up" in the American public's mind, you lose "fans."

Of course, we have the example of the Dixie Chicks, who in speaking their mind, alienated the pro-War, pro-Bush, pro-Texas contingent among their fans.

Or Tom Cruise, who goes Sciento-ballistic, jumps on couches, inseminates a pod-girl, and attacks antidepressants and everyone's favorite Calvin Klein jeans girl. Suddenly, he goes from being a Top 10 actor in popularity to something like #652.

Barbara Streisand yaps about liberal politics, and she becomes a conservative target and joke.

Mel Gibson has an anti-Semitic souse-fest, and, boom, all of a sudden, even a corpse like Sumner Redstone is showing him the door.

Bill Maher dares to make a comment in the days after 9/11 -- and adios tv show.

Most of these people have, for right or wrong, faced significant sanctions, loss of income, etc. It's a choice, right?

But...why is it that the conservative, wingnut types seem to get a free pass, time after time after time?

Why aren't we wondering "Hmmm...whatever happened to Ann Coulter?"

Well, at least we now know why "gay marriage" and "the homosexual agenda" are right up there at the top of the list of issues of concern to Rightwingnut Evangelical Conservatives...

Lieberman is no longer a Democrat. He should be stripped of his committee positions, and financing, etc.

Let the "Connecticut for Lieberman" party assign his committee positions and pay his bills...