Farewell, My Siren

My friends, we need to have a conversation about coffee.

Coffee shops continue to be the places where our society tends to gather, to set aside time to meet, and talk, occasionally even do business, serving much the same function that taverns served in years gone by. And as such, they deliver a kind of social experiment, or a kind of metric (albeit total arbitrary) to allow us to view our society as a whole.

Which is why calling the police on two African-American men sitting in a Starbucks turned into much more than the end of a career for a store manager. Because nothing that happens with Starbucks turns out to be only about Starbucks.

No matter when you might read this, whether just after I wrote it, a year from now, five years from now, or in the middle of the desolate post-apocalyptic nuclear desert that used to be America, I guarantee two things:

1.     There’s a Starbucks near you.
2.  There’s someone boycotting Starbucks.

Starbucks is the every-target, the easy punchline to jokes about liberal snowflakes, corporate monstrosities, tree-hugging hippies, and American white privilege. Whether you're a conservative talking about liberals and their social agenda, or a liberal talking about environmental damage and corporate greed, Starbucks makes a great villain. Partially, it makes an easy target, because the company is usually swift to not fight back, to not defend itself in the face of ridiculous criticism, like that the quarter inch of space left in the top of the cup is actually cheating the customer, instead of being a reasonable amount of room to leave to prevent severe hand injury.

In part because Starbucks is so ubiquitous, with all the jokes and parodies that implies, it is also a convenient mirror to reflect on ourselves, an easy frame to tell our stories. So, if you want to tell a story about people struggling to survive on minimum wage, go to Starbucks! Want to talk about poor nutrition and its contribution to obesity?  Starbucks! Religious freedom? Grab a cappuccino and tell me how oppressed you are!

And through it all, your local barista tops your caramel macchiato with a skillful cross-hatch-double-swirl pattern like it’s no big deal.  Starbucks is the company you either love to hate or hate to love, or both.  And for approximately 7 years, 3 months, 2 weeks, and 5 days, it was also my chosen place of employment.

If you ever stop in, tell them all I say hi.
Then, ask them if they've found the secret treasure I buried in the basement.

Up to now, I’ve been completely silent on the topic of Starbucks, not wanting to incur the wrath of the Siren.  But now, I’m free of any restraints on what I can say.  Which means I am free to say a few things. 

But not about the company, or the people who work there.  I still have enormous respect for a company that manages to be as progressive as it is in light of its need to produce profits in a very competitive marketplace, or about the baristas who work there, or really any coffeehouse, who must regularly endure some of the worst that humanity can toss at them. In contrast to recent news items, my experience has been of a company and a culture of being open and welcoming, in which all are treated with respected and dignity, and when something is truly wrong, I’ve seen the people there act swiftly to address it.

Yet Starbucks is also a microcosm of how our society treats those who provide simple services to us.  It’s a measure of how we treat people who we (using a very broad definition of “we” and not meant as an attack on any individual) deem inferior to us in some way, shape or form, particularly on the socio-economic spectrum.  Service workers, earning minimum wage, doing jobs that “we” frequently believe require no specialized skill set. 

This is a lot harder than it looks.  And it looks pretty damn hard.

So instead, let me address all Starbucks customers, past, present, or future, and let you know what you should never, ever do when ordering your drink at Starbucks.  Because, regardless of who is protesting Starbucks this time, these are the real crimes:

1. Puppuccino

Ever heard of a Puppuccino?  It’s a cup of whipped cream that someone decided to order for their dog.  Then, they posted it on the internet, which loved it (because, you know, “dog” + “internet” = “my day is wasted”).  So now, people will walk into a Starbucks, any Starbucks, and ask for a Puppuccino, and actually expect the barista to give them a cup of whipped cream.  If you want a cup of whipped cream, you should have to ask for a cup of whipped cream.  We know you don’t have a dog.

2. French Vanilla

This is a big one here in New England, home of Dunkin Donuts, and the subject of much controversy even in my own store.  There’s no such thing as French Vanilla at Starbucks.  This is important and bears repeating, in all caps:  There is NO SUCH THING AS FRENCH VANILLA AT STARBUCKS. 

It’s called “vanilla.”  It’s a flavor, derived from a variety of orchid.

In order to make it “French” you need to add another flavor, in this case usually hazelnut.  Now, they can make a coffee with vanilla and hazelnut.  Or they can make a vanilla coffee, which is what you probably thought you were ordering in the first place.  Or they can make you stand there and ask you which of these varieties you’d like (so with hazelnut, or with toffeenut, or with caramel?) until you get tired of the third degree and just order a butterbeer Frappuccino instead.

And speaking of butterbeer fraps…

   
3.  Ordering anything on the Secret Menu

I really, really hate this.  

Want to know why?  It’s not because these drinks are a pain in the ass (though they certainly are).  Baristas are paid to make drinks that are all a pain the ass.  No biggie.  Is it because they are all gross, containing two-three times as much sugar as the already overly sweet frappuccinos?  Nah, that’s on you.  You want something that full of sugar, that’s between you and your waistline.  No, the problem is that no one actually orders these drinks right.

Do not walk into a Starbucks and order a “Butterbeer Frappuccino,” and expect any response other than, “A what?”

Even the stupid Secret Menu web sites will let you in on the fact that these are not standard drinks, and they tell you how to order them.  But that never seemed to stop anyone from walking up to the counter and demanding a butterbeer Frappuccino, and getting a serious attitude when I didn’t know how to make a drink that I’s never been taught how to make and that follows none of the standard conventions of Starbucks drinks!

(And no, I'm NOT putting a link to that secret drink recipe. Because dammit, do not order a butterbeer frappuccino!  Ever!)

Please, Starbucks offers thousands of drinks, most of which are full of sugar, and none of which involve copyright infringement.  Just pick one and move on.  Make the butterbeer on your own time.

4.  “Triple Espresso Over Ice in a Venti Cup”

If this one sounds weird to you, good.  You're not one of the people this is aimed at.  You should feel better about yourself.  

It works like this:  You order three shots of espresso, over ice, in a large size cup.  You then proceed over to the condiment bar and fill the cup with milk from the milk pitchers.  You now have a iced latte for a fraction of the cost.  I could have used several examples for this behavior.

“Doppio espresso macchiato in a tall cup with foam up to the top.”  (This is a dry cappuccino.)

“Venti hot coffee, and put like two inches of steamed milk on top.”  (We call that a misto.)

Look, I know, Starbucks isn’t cheap.  What do you expect?  It’s a Starbucks.  The brand is not exactly synonymous with saving money.  Over the past few years, my favorite buzzwords there were “super premium,” because describing our products as “premium” wasn’t good enough to justify the prices we charged.

You want a cheap cup of coffee, go somewhere else.  You want Starbucks?  Pay the price and be happy about it.

5.  Coffee in the trashcan

Hot liquid.  Plastic trash bag.  Is this something you would do at home?  Don’t do it here, either.  Plus, you’re pouring out perfectly good caffeination!  Ask for a small cup to pour some out into, add some milk to both, and double-fist that coffee with pride!

 6. Don’t say hi

Actual conversation I’ve had nearly every day for the past seven years:

Me: “Good morning!  How are you doing today?”

Customer: “Tall coffee.”

*shoves Starbucks Gold Card at me*)

Me (in my head): “I’m doing great!  Thanks for asking!”

Why didn’t I make my snarky comment out loud?  Because while it seems socially acceptable to be rude to your average barista, people flip out if the barista returns it in kind.

7.  Making us take sides with whatever protest/boycott is happening this week

I’m so sorry that you are offended by our red cups. Yes, of course, your religion and personal belief system are clearly under attack. By me. Because I’m the godless heathen that designed the cups, in an effort to destroy your celebration of the birth of someone who pretty clearly wasn’t born when you think he was born. You’re right, this is all my fault.

Someone is (without exaggeration) ALWAYS mad about something that Starbucks is doing. All of which usually has little or nothing with what is going on in the life of your average barista, who just wants to sell coffee, get some decent tips, and drink enough espresso to make it through the day.

And bringing up the boycott du jour as a way of saying how much you disagree with it isn’t any better. You’re not really showing solidarity with the barista, because the barista truly doesn’t care. You're just making awkward, usually overly-friendly conversation. It’s uncomfortable. Just buy your coffee, tip well, and say thank you.

In truth, the only reason more baristas don’t completely lose it is because they know that the only people who regularly hang out in Starbucks and make awkward, slightly rude conversation are college students using the free wi-fi, blind dates who got stood up, and serial killers. And baristas don’t want to end up in the truck of anyone’s car.

The average barista, at any decent coffee shop or café, deals with enough crap every day.  So be kind to your barista, don't be rude, and maybe make them brownies once in a while.  I'll bet they'd like brownies.

I'm reading the NRA website so YOU won't have to

Ok, let me be super clear right upfront. This is not a blog designed to try and convince you that we need to pass gun control laws.

That would be stupid, for a number of reasons, including but not limited to:

1. I'm a guy who makes coffee for a living.  My opinions on gun control have about the same authority as the NRA's opinion of Starbucks.

2. I've made my opinions clear on this blog elsewhere.  Quite a bit.  They haven't change.  I don't like repeating myself.

3. If you're reading this blog, unless you've been suckered in by someone you generally trust but who likes sneaking inflammatory anti-gun propaganda to you while you're not looking, I'm assuming you already share my point of view, or at least are aware of it.

So I admit to not being a gun control expert, just a modest advocate.  And I'm also a dad, whose daughter regularly participates in lockdown drills.  And I'm not totally okay with that.  Because people shouldn't be.  So maybe I should stay out of any gun control debate, but as you see, it turns out I've got something at stake here after all.  Plus, I try to live my life so I will get attacked by Russian trolls on Twitter.

I have to believe that this is what they look like. Donald is the one of the left.

But now comes the time when people start immediately yelling at each other.  Arguments are thrown around, the same ones, repeated over and over, and we build up a world of noise that blocks the pain we should be feeling over the loss of human life and the natural desire any decent person feels in such a situation to do something to make it better.  And I truly believe that most gun owners in America are decent human beings who feel true pain at the thought of such tragedy.  Gun owners, I'm certain, want our kids to be safe in their schools. 

We need to do something.  We know that, but we disagree on what must be done, and rather than starting from our common ground, the shouting and horrid, disgusting rhetoric employed makes it so much easier to do nothing.  To throw up our arms.  To blame society, overall.  To say there's nothing that would prevent this.  That effective gun control that would save lives while not infringing on basic individual rights is impossible.

Excuse me, I thought we were America.  We specialize in doing the impossible!  Create a stable government without a monarch?  Impossible!  End slavery?  Impossible!  Go to the moon?  Impossible!  We should be passing national gun control laws just for the sheer American hell of it!

But then the shouting begins.  And most of it starts with the National Rifle Association, which seems hell-bent on stopping any gun control, no matter how socially beneficial it might be.  Not for any good reason, but just based on principle.  (Pro-tip: If your principles involve defending the right of a teenage boy to buy an AR-15, you don't have any.  I know what I'm talking about.  I used to be a teenage boy.)

So, when you get caught up in the inevitable argument with someone who believes in the scared status of the second amendment and the American right to guns, here's a few fun tips you might use to politely tell the myopic gun supporters where they can shove their bump stocks, if you catch my meaning.  And yes, I pulled many of these phrases and arguments from the NRA's website, which I cannot say enough that you should never, ever, ever go to.  That way only madness lies.  But I took a trip down that rabbit-hole so you won't have to.  You're welcome.

1. "Gun control won't stop crime."

This appeared in multiple places on the NRA's website.  Like, a lot.  Almost like they're trying to repeat something so much so that you will eventually believe it.  "Gun registration won't prevent or solve crimes."  "Universal background checks won't prevent or solve crimes."  "Gun owner licensing won't prevent or solve crimes."And I just have to call bullshit.  No, it won't solve all gun-related crime, but you're telling me that a national gun registry wouldn't be a useful tool for law enforcement?  We have a national DNA database which individuals may be in for a variety of reasons.  Why not have a database of registered firearms, too?  This is a simple, basic, unobtrusive step.  Background checks are already required for many purchases, this is an expansion of existing law, and shouldn't be controversial.  Unless you've got something to hide.  I'm looking at you, Donald.

2. "Less registration means less crime."

One of the other big claims on the NRA's website is that gun control laws don't stop criminals from getting guns.  They say this over and over, as though trying to do something to improve public safety is pointless because it won't work anyway.  Furthermore, citing mostly accurate statistics, the NRA would like to take credit for the violent crime rate in our country being at a 44-year low.  And their argument is that their political push to prevent gun control is a cause of lower crime rates.  Nice try.  Logical fallacy: Correlation could not equal causation.  We did nothing, because nothing will work, and look, it worked!  This is like me taking credit for the internet.  There are 100% more cat memes during the course of my lifetime.  You're welcome, world!

There are myriad factors that have contributed to the reduction in the violent crime rate over the decades, and a good amount of debate exists over the most important factors.  The NRA's opposition to gun control doesn't factor in.  And their flat dismissal of restrictions and legislation that we haven't given a decent chance is infuriating.  We tried an "assault weapon" ban in the 1990s, with a built-in expiration date in case it didn't work.  (I know, the term "assault weapon" is misleading and meaningless.  All guns are assault weapons, but the category is arbitrary.  I won't use it again.)  This was kind of a smart move, trying a restriction and making it temporary, to see if it has the desired effect.  We should do more of this.

3. "Gun control laws are actually racist."

I actually love this argument.  The NRA argues that gun laws used to be used to keep guns out of the hands of African-Americans, which is true, in the aftermath of the Civil War.  But then, all laws were used to keep African-Americans from doing something after the Civil War.  Hey, I'm Irish.  The English used to keep us from owning horses.  But, and I hope I'm not being too cynical, I have a hard time believing a group that is by its own numbers more than 60% white is big on protecting the rights of African-Americans today.

4.  "They're just actors."

Every time there is a national gun tragedy, and people are accused of politicizing it, someone is going to claim that the victims are actors, pretending to be victims, paid by anti-gun political groups.  Please.  My daughter watches the Disney Channel.  I've seen "Jessie," "Liv and Maddie," and "Lab Rats."  Young actors are terrible.

5. "Good guys with guns will stop bad guys with guns."

Hey, remember back during the Cold War when the Russians were bad guys who wanted to destroy America.  I know, seems laughable in retrospect.

Oh, you don't remember?  Well, I grew up in the eighties.  I remember Reagan, and the MX missiles and the Star Wars initiative.  And I remember believing that we were all going to die in a fiery nuclear holocaust.

It was freaking terrifying.

I do not want a Reagan-style arms race happening right on our streets, or worse, in our schools, with everyone wondering who has the bigger gun.  I don't want to wonder if the guy pulling out the assault rifle is the good guy or the bad guy.  I don't want my kids believing they will die in the crossfire of a gun fight between a good guy with a gun and a bad guy with a gun.  The Cold War was bad.  Please stop.

6. "Guns don't kill people.  People kill people."

Yeah.  With guns.

This is the stupidest thing I've ever heard, and I follow Trump on Twitter, so that's saying something.

7. "You liberal Socialist commies just want to take away my guns!"

First, is a liberal Socialist commie even a thing?  Just asking.

The government, regardless of the party in power, is not coming for your guns.  This is not the beginning of some totalitarian police state where woefully unarmed individuals have no means of defending themselves from the overreach of government authority.

You really want to keep your guns so you can resist the totalitarian government of the United States of America?  If the government wants to use the military to take away all your rights, your gun fetish collection, no matter how impressive and scary to a classroom of children, will be next to worthless against the most powerful military machines the world has ever known.  The argument is completely absurd.  So absurd that if you encounter anyone making this argument, that they need to hold onto their guns to defend themselves from the government, your best reaction will be to offer them a tin-foil hat and back away slowly.

7. "They just want to trample on my rights."

The "rights" they are talking about here boil down to the second amendment to the Constitution.  For those of you wondering, the second amendment reads, in its entirety:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Yes, we're going to talk about the second amendment, which seems to say that Americans have a right to own guns.  Even the Supreme Court has said so.  Pretty solid case, right?  Um, no, not really.  If you're in an argument about gun ownership and someone whips out the ol' second amendment argument, that means you've basically won.

Yes, the second amendment to the Constitution does say Americans have a right to keep and bear arms, and by arms, it does mean guns, not like a pre-industrial Doctor Octopus.  (Though that would be cool.  Sam Raimi, call me!)

But the Constitution, as it was written and adopted in 1787 grants lots of rights.  It includes the right to own slaves.  Any document, of whatever historical value, that is totally cool with people owning other people has definitely lost any moral authority over our current debates.  Saying that the rights guaranteed in the Constitution are somehow universal and sacred conflates the Constitution with the Declaration of Independence, which states that certain rights are sacred and "inalienable," including Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.  Pretty sure a guy with a gun has infringed on those rights for certain high school students recently, and that's simply unacceptable.

We have a method for amending the Constitution for a reason.  Let's use it.

So while I believe in and will defend the right to gun ownership, and the right to self-defense, I also believe in the necessity of realistic regulations and restrictions on firearms.  I don't believe these are mutually exclusive ideas.  Meanwhile, the NRA seems to be focused on denial and obstruction.  Almost like they're scared of losing the money and political influence they've gained over the years if people finally find a solution to gun violence in our country.  

But never forget that while the NRA is a powerful political machine, it's far, far less powerful than the concerted effort of individuals writing and calling their Congressional representatives and demanding action.  And voting the shitheads out when they don't act.  So get going.  Demand answers.  Demand action.  Hold them accountable.  Need to know who to call?

Here you go.

You know what to do.

How a Middle-Aged Man Finally Starts Something He Should Have Done Years Ago

Happy January!  So, what was your New Year’s resolution?

Really?  Again?

I think I’ve said here before that I’m not much into New Year’s resolutions.  But a couple years ago, I suddenly got a little serious (highly unusual for this here blogger) and resolved to write more.  Not here, not for you guys.  I love you guys, but I had another audience in mind.  Write for my kids.

It took a little while, but this year, for Christmas, they were able to unwrap a book, a real, actual professionally printed book, full of time travel adventures and sibling misadventures and dinosaurs, written by their dad and starring both of them.

Those kids look vaguely familiar...

And because it’s a real book, their adventurers have become available to anyone who wants to read them.  (That made Christmas shopping for friends and family REALLY easy this year.)

“Ok, sure, but did they like it?”

Um, my son is three.  He likes apple juice.  Ask him again in five years.  As for my daughter, she keeps asking me if I’m writing the next one yet.

Spoiler alert: I am.  And the third one, too.

Hard at work.

So, I wrote a book, some people have actually bought it.  Someone even reviewed it!  (Thanks, by the way, that was nice.)  I’m pretty sure that makes me an actual independent children’s book author.  Mission accomplished!

It's important to have a good author photo.

So, am I in this for the money?  The fame?  Yes.  Yes, I am.

I’ve been writing stuff since high school.  In college, I was practically prolific, even managing to write a radio play every week for two straight years.  I’ve slowed down a little since then.

After college, I started working in bookstores.  We didn’t have very high opinions of self-published authors.  It was nothing personal.  I read those self-published books.  Many were crap.  Some were quite good.  But even the good ones were nearly impossible to sell.  Writers needed publishers, needed their connections, their resources, their marketing skills.  This was the early 2000s, back when internet startups were good investments and people were just starting to realize they could share music online.

Fast forward, and I remember watching the rise of social media sites, watching the rise of social media marketing, the rise of tablets and ebook readers, and it suddenly occurred to me that the publishing industry was about to hit a crossroads of sort, like the music industry had years before.

I remember having a conversation with a friend, nearly a decade ago, that independent publishing was now not only possible, but viable, with authors able to reach audiences without the resources of mainstream publishers.  One could, if you put the work into it, be a successful writer without a major publishing house behind you.

But that doesn’t mean I’m quitting my job and doing this independent writer thing full-time.  Maybe twenty year ago, I’d give it a go and see how much I could make shamelessly peddling my wares.  These days, I have too few wares and too much shame.  But it does seem like an interesting experiment: can an independent author/publisher circumvent the publishing industry, those who once held the keys to the gates of success?  As I’ve said, I think the answer now is yes.

And after all, I’m going to write the books either way.  And not just the kids books.  You guys know about Pieces of Eight, and there are more.  If I'm gonna write them, might as well try to sell them, too.

And now, Faithful Reader, you must be expecting the shameless plug portion of this blog.  You are, perhaps, expecting the part where I tell you all to go buy my book?  Where I paste in the links for the hardcover version, and the paperback version, and then I point out the Kindle version is very reasonably priced, and you’ll be helping pay for Ella’s college education?  The part where I tell you to buy a copy, buy two, give one to a friend, tell everyone you know with a daughter that they need to read it, and share my posts about it on Facebook, and Twitter, and Linkedin, and, I don’t know, maybe Pinterest?  Or where I ask you to write a review for it on Amazon?  The part of this blog where I metaphorically get down on my knees and beg you to buy my book?

But I'm not going to do any of that.  

I don't have to.  You already know what to do.  So, go to it!

Ella and Leo Save the Fairies should hopefully be out later this year, in time for Christmas shopping.

Spoiler: They save the fairies.

Fight and Flight: Running for Dad

Running is, considered through the wide lens of human history, an almost ridiculously useful ability. 

As a crucial part of the fight-or-flight reflex (or at least the flight part), it kept our species from being eaten by, well, most anything.  Saber-toothed kangaroos, or some such.  From being eaten, regardless.  Or take for example the incredible Incan empire of South America.  The Incans never invented the wheel, but they built miles and miles and miles of roads that still survive to this day, to connect a massive, sprawling empire.  Why roads?  For running!  Incans used runners to carry messages between their far-flung cities.  Again, running became a crucial ingredient in human civilization, allowing communication across vast distances.

Today, however, I have a cell phone, and my only fight-or-flight-type reflex is curling up in a whimpering ball on the floor.

In other words, I’m not a runner.

Which is why I hesitated when my sister called me and said, “Would you want to do the Newport Bridge run with me as a fundraiser in support of Dad?”

My sister is no more of a runner than I am.

So, I said yes.

And then curled up into a whimpering ball on the floor.

It seems funny, perhaps, that in a blog devoted to fatherhood (and beer, and left-wing politics, and writing, and, well, you get the picture) I’ve devoted very little time to talking about my own dad.  But I know he’s always been a private man, and probably wouldn’t have wanted me throwing stories about him up all over the internet.  (Like I am now!)

Or post pictures of him...

But several years ago, we started noticing Dad acting a little different.  His walk was a little uneven, his hands shook, his speech sounded a little slower, even a little bit slurred.  He went to see some doctors, finally. They thought initially it could be Parkinson’s Disease, and I thought, Just like Michael J. Fox!  Then, they diagnosed him with Progressive Supranuclear Palsy, or PSP.

And I thought, What’s that?

Progressive Supranuclear Palsy is a progressive (duh!) neurodegenerative disease, in which brain communication to the body is interrupted.  It is considered a Parkinsonism, or a Parkinson’s Plus syndrome, which just means that it can easily be mistaken for Parkinson’s because the symptoms are so similar.  But while similar, and while both diseases seem to be connected to certain proteins in the brain that somehow damage nerve cells, they seem to be caused by different proteins.  And, most importantly, treatments for Parkinson’s don’t seem to work well, or at all, on PSP.  In fact, PSP has no widely effective treatment, and no cure.

A couple years after this diagnosis, as we watched the disease progress, I was talking to Dad and he mentioned that they thought maybe he didn’t have PSP after all.  From the way he was losing control of one side of his body faster than the other side, his doctor thought it could be Corticobasal Degeneration, or CBD.

“Oh,” I said.  “Is there a treatment for that?”

“Nope.”

“So, instead of one three-letter disease with no cure, you might have a different three-letter disease with no cure?”

“Or both.”

“How do they find out?”

“They won’t know until they look at my brain after I die.”  Then, my dad added, as only he could, “Someone finally wants me to give them a piece of my mind.”

So, PSP, or CBD, no treatment, no cure.  And very little research being done.  For example, a search of clinical studies through the National Institutes of Health website yielded 65 studies on PSP.  And 1883 studies on Parkinson's disease. 

Why?

Simple.  Over a million people, including Michael J. Fox, suffer from Parkinson’s Disease.  Estimates for PSP are around 20,000 people.  Where do you think most of the research money goes?  Not that I don’t understand; it makes completely logical sense.  If you only have a limited amount of money, you target that money to where it can do the most good.

That doesn’t stop me from wishing, hoping, that some breakthrough could happen, that the progress of the disease could be stopped.  That some of the symptoms could be eased.  That Dad could do something as simple as put his arms up and wrap them around his grandkids.

No, really, he's going to hate that I posted these...

But little research is still some research, and it may well fall to private fundraising, rather than reliance on government funding, to provide for further research.  Which brings me to why we’re running.  

We’re running (or at least shuffling in a very funny manner) across the Newport Bridge on October 22nd in order to raise awareness and money for an organization called CurePSP.  None of the money we raise will do anything directly, or probably even indirectly, to help Dad.  Instead, our hope is to help some future family, like our own, not have to experience this.  That some future dad might get more of a chance to enjoy a retirement doing what he loves, whether or not that involves antique firetrucks (though I kinda hope it does). We hope that through organizations like CurePSP, research will continue to at least increase the quality of care and quality of life for people with PSP, CBD, or similar diseases, or even find effective treatments and, someday, a cure.

Running over the Newport Bridge seems particularly fitting.  When he was working, keeping the lights on for the bridge was one of his jobs.  Dad was always being called out at night to fix those lights, which I think at least sometimes involved him climbing up the suspension cables.  I recall he was even featured in a local magazine article on the most dangerous jobs in Rhode Island.  The bridge seems like the perfect thing to feature in this run in his honor.  It’s also two freaking miles long, while I get winded chasing Leo down the aisle in Target.  And the whole course from start to finish is four miles, which makes me wonder just what I’ve gotten myself into.

But, I downloaded the Couch-to-5k app (finishing up Week 5!), set my alarm for 5:30am, and loaded some inspirational music to my ipod (you know, the usual stuff: Everclear, Better Than Ezra, the Muppets, Randy Newman…).

And so, I run.  Because running is part of our natural instinct, fight or flight.  But in Dad’s case, he doesn’t have a choice.  He can’t run.  So we will.

Visit our page on crowdrise to find out how you can help.  Thanks.