Can it really true? A Web site devoted entirely to...(suppressed squeal)...shoes?

Apparently it is true. Shoetube.tv is slated to debut in Feb. '08 and will feature anything and everything involving those marvelous little additions to our feet. Although not much more is known right now, you can check out more here: http://shoetube.tv/shoetube...

Now, some might call me a shoe-aholic, considering I buy shoes with the same frequency that most people buy toilet paper. But if owning about 60 pairs stilettos is wrong I don't want to be right. Plus, I can stop at any time. What?! I can. Look, I'll throw away my credit cards right now to prove it...er, well, I will tomorrow (there's a sale at Kohl's today).

But as much as I love shoes, I can't help but wonder if a Web site like this will be successful. I mean, I love to wear my shoes, to go shopping for shoes and to talk about shoes non-stop (much to my boyfriend's delight, as you can guess), but an entire Web site devoted to it? Are there really that many aspects to shoes? 

The preview for the Web site is touting that they will have professional blogs about shoes, along with

"broadcast-quality programming, user-generated videos/photos, and sponsor-created content. You'll also find articles on what's going on in the footwear industry...and tons of community features."

Now even though this comment may get me kicked out of the Carrie Bradshaw sisterhood, I have to voice my doubts that shoes, no matter how cute, are really that interesting (pause as I wait for a mob of angry stiletto holding women to knock down my door and pummel me with Jimmy Choos...).

That said, however, I can guarantee that I will be one of the first on the Web site to check it out when it does debut. I mean, you never know. Maybe I'll find my "sole" mate on there (Bah-Dum-CHING!...thank you, thank you, ladies and gentlemen....I'll be here all week...be sure to try the veal).

Oh, 2007, we will miss you. You've given us so many wonder things the past 365 days (give or take a couple). I mean, without you, we would have never met the wonder that is American Idol loser Sanjaya. Or been exposed to Britney Spear's nether regions (insert simultaneous group shudder here). Oh, without you 2007, we would have never uttered this year's most disturbing buzz word for a female anatomy part: "Vajajay."

But now that you are winding down, it's time to look back at all the best and worst you had to offer, 2007. And so, here are my nominees:

Celebrity Most Likely to Lose it All: This going to be a close one between Amy Winehouse, Lindsay Lohan and good, 'ol Britney (nominees David Hasselhoff and Michael Richards were disqualified considering no one really cares if they lose it all) All of these lovely ladies are a horrific train wreck that you just can't stop looking at. It's going to be a close call.

Most Annoying Person: Again, another tough category considering the wealth of choices. And the nominees are: Larry Birkhead, Donald Trump, Tyra Banks and Sanjaya's hair.

Most Over-hyped Gadget: It's a neck and neck race between the iPhone and the Nintendo Wii. Unless they start making Julian fries, I'm sooo over hearing about them.

Celebrity Who Just Won't Go Away: These guys are worse then most STD's. They just keep coming back. And the nominees are: Paris Hilton, Nicole Richie and Lauren Conrad of MTV's "The Hills."

 Worst movies of 2007 (nominated by Advocate reporter and movie guru Bj Lewis): "Delta Farce," "Spiderman 3," and "Underdog." (And please, whatever you do, do not ask Bj why he nominated "Spiderman 3." Fifteen minutes later, you'll wish you were dead and never want to hear the words "Sam Raimi" again).

Worst Reality TV Show: These are the kind of shows you watch and then envy the people in that "Hostel" movie who were tortured because at least through their immense pain, they couldn't concentrate on watching someone sucking on New York's toes. And the nominees are: "A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila (a.k.a. Misshapen Forehead Girl from Myspace)," "I Love New York II," and "Celebrity Rap Superstar."

Feel free to cast your votes or suggest other categories as we say goodbye to 2007.

This story just proves my theory that people should have to get a parent license before they are allowed to procreate.

I don't know how many of you have heard about the suicide of Megan Meier, the 13-year-old girl from St. Louis who killed herself last year after her online "boyfriend" cruelly broke up with her on MySpace and then became a victim of an onslaught of cyber-bullying.

Tragic tale, no? But here's the kicker. The "boyfriend" and the person who orchestrated all the cyber-bullying against the girl was Lori Drew, the mother (oh yes, I said mother, as in an adult) of one of Megan's former friends.

It seems Drew created the profile to get back at Megan for wrongs she had done to her daughter. She created created a fake myspace page, posing as a 16-year-old boy interested in dating Megan. Drew gained her trust, got other people in on the plan, including Megan's teenage friends and then finally made a nasty little scheme to give what she calls "Megan a taste of her own medicine."

The plan backfired, and Megan, who Drew knew had a history of depression, killed herself. The story caused a media firestorm when it first happened in Oct. 2006.

When I first heard about this, I couldn't believe it. Sure no parent wants to see their kid hurt but to go to those lengths to get back at a 13-year-old? Are you kidding me?

But I think the worst part of all this is that now Drew is trying to tell her side of the story and while I fully believe she should be given every opportunity to do that, what she is saying is mind-boggling. Now granted, the authenticity of this blog posted by a woman calling herself Lori Drew hasn't been proven, but it sounds like it might be legit. And if it is, Lord help us all.

You can read the blog here: http://meganhaditcoming.blo...

For the original story, click here: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/s...

As much as I understand a parent's need to protect their child, this woman was an adult preying on a 13-year-old girl. I don't care if the child was an evil, manipulative little brat. She was 13. When I was 13, I'm sure there were more than a few people who wanted to wring my little bratty neck. But they didn't. And more importantly, I didn't have adults scheming how to ruin my life.

And true, I don't think anyone believes Lori Drew set out to make Megan commit suicide, but that still doesn't absolve her from what she did. As an adult she should have known better. Teens have fragile self-esteem and psyches. The last thing they need is an adult, a mother, no doubt, scheming to turn their life into a living hell.