Monthly Archives: March 2005

Frank Rich makes an amazing but not illogical leap: From Gilbert Gottfried telling a dirty joke at a Friars Roast to current attempts by some in our government to stifle political dissent.

Okay. So when we last left the saga of Mark's Garage Door, the top of its frame had suddenly and tragically split in two, rendering it useless insofar as opening and closing was concerned. In other words, the thing was broken. This occurred the evening of February 28. The afternoon of March 1, a man came by from the garage door company and — with the kind of perception that distinguishes a true craftsperson from the rest of us layfolks — looked at the split wooden frame and ventured the professional opinion that the door was broken. Following a bit of math, it was further determined that, given what it would cost to repair, I might as well kick in a few more bucks and get a whole new door. I've been arranging for the garage to be re-roofed so a new door would fit right in. (The new sign of status in Southern California is no longer that you have a development deal or a hit movie or series. It's that you have a roofer coming.)

I wanted the door installed as soon as possible. In my neighborhood, there are all sorts of complex rules: You can't park on the North side of the street between 8 AM and 10 AM on a Wednesday unless you have a certain sticker on your car, in which case you can park on the South side on Tuesdays and Thursday between Noon and 2 PM except during a total eclipse or if you bought the car from a guy named Artie…something like that. Anyway, it's much simpler for me, to say nothing of convenient, to be able to park in my garage. This, I could not do until the new door was installed. The Garage Door Man assured me this could be done the following Friday (3/4) or, at the latest, the Tuesday after that (3/8). I gave him a deposit and he said that as soon as they knew when the new door was ready, they'd give me a call — like, the night before — so I could be here then.

All week, I played the little, annoying game of parking on the street, figuring out where to leave my car at night. Thursday evening, I received no call. I cancelled an appointment on Friday so I could be here, just in case, but I didn't hear from them all day…which meant that parking on the street would continue throughout the three-day weekend. Monday, I called to ask if, as promised, I would be receiving my new garage door on Tuesday. No one at the garage door company seemed able to tell me yea or nay.

First thing Tuesday morning, I phoned and politely demanded to know if and when that day, my new garage door would be installed. I spoke to a succession of people who did not know, each of whom transferred my call to someone else who did not know. When finally my query arrived at the owner of the company, I was informed that they had no record of my order. The new door had not been made. No one was scheduled to come out to my place that day. They didn't doubt that I had ordered it and paid a deposit but, frustratingly, they would have to send someone out to re-measure the door and begin the process of making me a door and it might take another week and…well, you can just imagine how delighted I was with the situation. Fume, snarl, pout.

Five minutes later, the proprietor called me back with a wild theory. They had no current paperwork on my order, true. But was it possible that this was because it had already been filed? That the door had already been installed? I told them this seemed unlikely since no one from their company had ever phoned to say they wanted to come over, and I had not been away from the house much in the previous week. Still, it was not a metaphysical impossibility. My house is on a corner and my garage does not face the same street as my front door. I realized I had not driven past or walked by my garage in several days.

So my friend Carolyn and I went out and looked…and sure enough, there was a new garage door on my garage. Further consultation with the company yielded the data that it had been installed the previous Friday, perhaps even while I was home. Instead of calling ahead or even knocking on my front door when they got here, the installers had just gone in, taken the old door off and put in the new one without telling me. I'd been doing the park-on-the-street shuffle for days when I could have been opening my new door and parking in my old garage.

I felt an odd mix of emotions: Pleased was I that the garage door problem was behind me…but annoyed was I that it had been resolved four days earlier and no one had told me. The gent at the garage door company was embarrassed, and also puzzled to find himself apologizing that his men had done a job when they'd said they were going to do it.

So anyway, let this be a lesson to you all. I'm not sure what you might learn from it but let it be a lesson of something to you. Maybe it's that before you complain that they haven't installed your new garage door, you ought to go out and check to see if they've installed your new garage door. Or something like that. Anyway, today's the day when a different outfit is supposed to begin putting a new roof on that garage. But I haven't heard a word from them so maybe they've already done it.

Paul Krugman on the new bankruptcy bill. What it comes down to: Mismanaged corporations can still declare bankruptcy but if unexpected medical bills plunge your family into debt, you're outta luck.

Last night, GSN ran an episode of What's My Line? from 1955 (I believe) where one of the contestants signed in as Mrs. Dale Strom. She was introduced that way because one or more of the panelists might have recognized her maiden (and professional) name, Dale Messick, as the creator of the comic strip, Brenda Starr. Dale, who will be 99 years old in April, began drawing the adventures of the intrepid lady reporter in 1940 and, it is said, never missed a deadline — not even to birth her children — until she handed the strip off to others in 1980.  The above photo is from around the time that happened.

Brenda Starr was a popular feature that never quite made it onto the radar of comic strip buffs. I'm not sure why. It was drawn with great energy and humor, and the writing stands up far better than many strips of its era. Years ago, afforded the opportunity to read long runs of classic funnypage faves, I found some were readable and some were not. Li'l Abner was, Flash Gordon wasn't…though with Flash Gordon, looking at the pictures was sometimes enough. The Phantom, I could read. Mark Trail, I could not…and Harold Gray's talky, preachy Little Orphan Annie actually induced some form of Attention Deficit Disorder in me. I would read Panel One and literally forget everything about it while making the brief trip over to Panel Two.

But like I said, Brenda Starr was fun and while it's probably not on anyone's short list of Comic Strips That Deserve To Be Republished In Their Entirety, the way Peanuts is now being reprinted, you could do a lot worse. Seeing its maker on What's My Line? last night prompted me to suggest that there's a strip worthy of more attention. (The current version by June Brigman and Mary Schmich ain't bad, either.)

"Stavner" (that's how he signs his e-mails) writes to ask the following…

RE: Michael Jackson: Could you please be more specific about why you think he'll walk?

I can't be that much more specific about why I think The King of Pop will go unconvicted…and it's certainly not something about which I feel certain. (There could still be one of those startling Perry Mason-style revelations, either way.) It's more of a hunch, taking off from the fact that there seems to be no paucity of evidence that the parents of the allegedly-violated lad are of low moral fibre and perhaps not above trumping up a molestation charge to get cash. That doesn't mean Jackson didn't molest the kid but it goes a long way to helping his attorneys cast reasonable — or maybe unreasonable doubt.

The case against O.J. Simpson (you remember him) was an overwhelming case. For God's sake, his blood was found at the murder site. Still, a well-financed defense squad managed to sell the idea that there was "something wrong" with that case in unspecified ways. They never offered a coherent theory as to how and why all of this evidence could have been phonied up and planted. No one ever has. In fact, the most serious attempt I ever saw didn't even come from Simpson's lawyers. It was a website — no longer up — that tried to explain every damning exhibit and circumstance in pro-O.J. spin. It yielded a conspiracy wherein about a hundred different people with no motive whatsoever decided to frame Simpson and made a series of incredible guesses as to how to accomplish this…and, of course, were damn lucky that no evidence of the "real killers" was found and that O.J. just happened to not have an alibi for the time in question.

Simpson's actual legal team didn't even do that. They just convinced the jury that a frame-up was in the air, and if the facts said Simpson did it, the facts could not be trusted. It's starting to smell like something similar is happening in the Jackson case. His lawyers can't possibly explain every bit of evidence against him but they can come up with questions on some, alternate theories on others…and for the rest, they've got the argument that the D.A. is pursuing a personal vendetta and that the parents are just the kind of people who would phony-up a case.

Today, the brother of the supposedly-molested boy testified about Jackson giving them alcohol and playing sex games with them. Then, on cross-examination, Jackson's side got the witness to admit he'd lied in a lawsuit the parents once filed against J.C. Penney. So now the argument will be that if he'd lie in that case, you can't trust what he says in this one. That raises a doubt and if the jury decides to give Jackson the benefit of that doubt, he'll go free. I'm not suggesting it's inevitable; just that it's starting to feel like things are drifting in that direction. And who knows? Maybe that's the truth of the situation. Maybe Jackson is innocent, at least of this particular accusation. I just think it's unfortunate that if he goes free, it will be because they put the parents on trial, the same way the O.J. lawyers turned things into a trial of the L.A.P.D. Over the years, studies have shown that a lot of rape victims decline to report the crime or testify because they fear their morals will be impugned and misinterpreted. Somewhere out there, there's a set of parents who will feel much the same way if their child is abused, especially if it's by someone rich and powerful. They won't even call the police because they won't want to find themselves in a trial that's all about them and their motives.

The Internet Movie Database has decided that Joe Barbera did not pass away last year and has removed the date of death from his listing.

In other non-dead news, I see Abe Vigoda is still alive.

The Animation Guild is holding its Golden Awards Banquet on April 9, 2005, 6 pm at the Pickwick Gardens in Burbank, California. This event honors those veterans who've logged fifty (count 'em — 50) years in the field of animation and certain related fields. This year's honorees began their careers between 1943 and 1955, during the heyday of Warner Bros, UPA, Disney, Walter Lantz, etc. Tickets are still available. You can order and see a list of the honorees here.

For those of you following the saga of Peter Paul and the now-defunct company he set up for Stan Lee, another chapter is unfolding.

I've tried — Lord, how I've tried — to pay zero attention to the Michael Jackson case. This is not easy. I could easily avoid seeing any sign of the War in Iraq (that is still going on, right?) and the proposed evisceration of Social Security. But to venture anywhere near a source of news is to glimpse Circus Jacko, and there's no way around it.

A few days in, it's already beginning to look like Jackson will moonwalk. Ironically, Jay Leno — who has done so much to convince the world that Michael is a pedophile — may testify and become be a key contributor to Jackson's freedom. And sadly, it looks like if the King of Pop does go free, the reason will be that his lawyers have convinced the jury that the parents of the allegedly-molested kid are money-grubbing sleazeballs. This will be sad because if Jackson does go free, it would be nice if it was because he actually didn't commit the crime. But I'm not sure that kind of thing matters much anymore.

Speaking of Rhino Handmade, as I did a few items ago, I should mention that they still have copies available of their superb Soupy Sales CD set. It contains the full contents of his 1961 record, The Soupy Sales Show, which I played the hell out of when it first came out. It also has the entirety of his '62 follow-up, Up in the Air, plus a few singles and oddments, and the best thing is that Clyde Adler is also heard on it. (You can learn why this matters to me by reading this article.) Soupy's not the greatest singer, and I'd rather see him than listen to him…but his records were still fun.

My occasional items here about the Soupman bring me two or three e-mails per week from folks who fondly remember watching his program, so I know we have a lot of Soupy fans logging in here. If you're one, you might want to order this thing quickly, since they only pressed 2500 copies and can't have very many of them left. Go to the Rhino Homemade site and search for "Soupy."

This may seem a tad tardy but I just got around to watching last week's episode of The Late Show With David Letterman with Dan Rather in the guest chair. Having read on many a blog that Letterman did a great, incisive interview and that Rather came back with good, dignified answers, I must say I felt let down on both counts. One can forgive Letterman for lobbing softballs since it is a comedy show, since Rather is a fellow CBS asset, and since Dave seems genuinely fond of the guy. I think "real" reporting has gotten so bad in this country that when a David Letterman or Jon Stewart asks something that's the tinest bit challenging, people fall all over themselves to praise it, either because it's such a novelty or because it slams reporters to note that comedians are often doing a better job of covering the news. One of the few comments of Rather's that impressed me was when he talked about the new softness of reporters who don't challenge those in power for fear of losing access.

But for the most part, Dan Rather continues to be a man who disappoints me every time I see him, and who should have left the anchor chair about half-past the administration of George Herbert Walker Bush. He really was a good reporter at one time…or, at least, he resembled a good reporter enough to remind us what that meant. He asked tough questions and he challenged the answers he received. Some folks hated him because they only think it should be done to the other side; that when you do it to theirs it's bias or disrespect or whatever you have to say to discredit the messenger. But I think the press should always be at least slightly hostile to those in power, and to the extent Rather represented that in his pre-anchoring days, I thought he was a good newsman. Back then.

The centerpiece of the man's visit to Letterman was, of course, the discussion of the infamous Bush National Guard Memo flap. Rather admitted error and hid behind the findings of the CBS internal investigation that said it was a screw-up but not one motivated by political objectives. I think that's probably true, but I also thought Rather was dead wrong when he tried to argue that America was not about to turn out an incumbent president in a time of war, and that Bush was going to get in again, no matter what. Did Dan not notice how close that election was? How even midway through Election Day, some of the pollsters thought Kerry was going to win? Even if true, "Bush was going to win anyway" is not an excuse for anything, and I thought Rather said it to respond to a charge that Letterman did not raise but others have: That the CBS screw-up took the focus off Bush's actual, probably-damning National Guard record and instead made him look like the victim of a smear.

Rather also defended himself by noting that the makers of the CBS internal report said they were unable to prove the documents were forgeries. Some bloggers were outraged at this comment, noting that the burden of proof should be on CBS to establish legitimacy, not on anyone's ability to prove the opposite. They're right…and one might note that one expert consulted by the internal investigators was pretty adamant that the alleged National Guard papers were bogus. Still, I think Rather was trying to say that despite what some have claimed, it was not inarguably obvious that the documents were phony. In fact, he still seems to be taking the position that while they should not have been used, there remains some question as to whether or not they were fakes. One wonders if he truly thinks that's so, or if he just figures that it's a less embarrassing stance to hold. Based on his sorry defense of sorry actions, I'm inclined to believe the latter.

Still, I'll make a prediction here that in his new assignments, Rather will return to hands-on investigative reporting; that he will move mountains to come up with some big, sensational scoop that will eclipse the recent, sorry escapade and not leave "Rathergate" as the final chapter of his career. I'm not saying he'll succeed in this. It's been a long time since Rather has been known for anything other than quirky bromides and arousing the ire of the political right. But if somehow, he can tap into the part of him that he lost when he left the White House beat, he just might pull it off.

Gary Sassaman reports on what he did last night, which was to spend An Evening With Groucho. Well, actually, it wasn't Groucho. It was Frank Ferrante. But these days, Frank is a lot funnier.

As you can see by earlier postings here, we're big fans of America's foremost parodier of songs. Those postings have prompted a lot of e-mails from folks asking me where they can get Allan Sherman recordings, especially the rarer items.

There's no announcement up yet on their site but I have it on good authority that Rhino Handmade is prepping a boxed CD set of Allan Sherman goodies. It will not include his RCA album with the Boston Pops, but that's available on CD now. It will also not include his few early, obscure recordings for Jubilee Records. But it will include all eight of his albums for Warner Brothers, including some leftover material and alternate takes that didn't make it onto the original releases. It will also include all his singles for that company, some earlier unreleased recordings from parties, and two albums that he did as industrial/commercial jobs — Music to Dispense With, his ultra-rare album for the Dixie Cups company, and one he recorded for a carpet company. In all my years of collecting Sherman, I've never been able to score a copy of the Dixie Cups record, and I never even heard of the other one. So this is all very welcome news.

My Son, the Box is supposed to be out around June of this year. Rhino Handmade does limited pressings that actually sell out and become unavailable, so we're going to keep an eye out for this, and I'll let you know when to order. Or if you see an availability before I do, you tell me. But I thought I oughta let you know before any of you spend any more bucks on eBay for this material.

This is interesting…I think. I mentioned yesterday that if one does a Google search, one discovers how few people who write about Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster know how to spell either or both of their surnames. I was going to point out how this is also true of Charles Schulz, creator of Peanuts — so many people insist on spelling it "Schultz" — but I see that Google compensates for this. If you search for "Schultz AND Peanuts," it just assumes you mean "Schulz" and proceeds accordingly.

I'm used to Google figuring out typos. If I go to search for "David Leterman," it asks me if I meant "David Letterman." But in the case of Schultz/Schulz, it doesn't even bother to ask.

I'm guessing — and will probably find out for sure, since at least one Google employee reads this site — that Google builds some sort of database of common spelling errors, noting how many people take it up on its suggested corrections. When the volume reaches some specified level, it just starts taking people directly to the correction. Is that how it works?

Here's another reminder that if you live in the Los Angeles area, you have the rare opportunity to meet June Foray, buy her new book and get her to sign it to you. A goodly chunk of the local animation community will turn out this coming Wednesday evening to salute the First Lady of Cartoon Voicing…the tonsils behind Rocky the Flying Squirrel, Natasha Fatale, Granny and so many more. Your objective is the Barnes & Noble shop in The Grove at Farmers Market, and June will appear at 7:30 PM. Don't miss this one.

Speaking of appearances by animation's greats: On March 16, the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences (the Emmy people) will be unveiling a wall sculpture at their headquarters out at 5220 Lankershim Blvd. in North Hollywood. Only a few TV legends have been so honored and on that morning at 11 AM, they'll be adding Bill Hanna and Joe Barbera to their Hall of Fame Plaza. Mr. Barbera is expected to attend, even though the Internet Movie Database has somehow decided he passed away in 2004.

I've just sent in a correction. Let's see how long it takes them to change it.