Monthly Archives: May 2007

Back when Ronald Reagan first proposed his missile defense shield program, which some later called "Star Wars," a number of prominent scientists and space technicians said, quite simply, "It will never work." So far, it hasn't. We've poured billions and billions of dollars into it and it not only hasn't worked, it hasn't even yielded a reason to think it might someday work. The folks behind it — who in most cases have been paid quite well over the years and seem to consider that aspect of the project a success — have even tried rigging the tests to get a positive result and even the rigged outcomes aren't particularly encouraging.

The latest test was yet another fiasco. They couldn't even get the target missile in position, let alone send an interceptor missile to take it out. The people behind it are trying to spin this as proof that we really, really need the missile defense shield program. The new logic goes something like this: The fact that we can't get a target missile into the right position proves that the enemy might not get their real missiles into the right place and they might threaten an unintended target…so to protect that unintended target, we must have a working missile defense shield program.

It's not unlike the logic of The Surge: If violence in Iraq goes down, it proves The Surge is working because it's bringing down the level of violence. And if violence in Iraq goes up, it proves The Surge is working because it's drawing out the violent elements. The important thing is not to succeed. It's to never admit someone had a bad idea.

This coming Wednesday, my unindicted co-conspirator pal Earl Kress and I will be back on Stu's Show, the cornerstone program on Shokus Internet Radio, which is part of the teeming Live365 network of web-based broadcasting. Our topics this time will include, I am told, Beany and Cecil, David Seville, Milton the Monster, Batfink, Hanna-Barbera's cartoon interpretations of Laurel & Hardy and Abbott & Costello, as well as a host of other stuff including De Patie-Freleng, Ruby-Spears, and what it was like for some of us to write for those studios. There will also be your live call-in phone calls and trivia questions with prizes and a whole lotta fun.

It all begins at 4 PM Pacific Time (7 PM Eastern) and runs for two hours. You can listen by going to this website then and selecting an audio browser. (Note: If you log in just before the show starts, there's a slight chance that you'll get bumped off when the show starts. If that happens, just log right back in and it shouldn't happen again. There's some sort of glitch in the Live365 software that occasionally does that when a station switches from pre-recorded programming to live.)

I'll nag you again about this tomorrow.

I'm going to jump all around in my report on my trip last week and today, I'm going to jump to the topic of Fast Food. In a way, this ties in with that long post I wrote last week about my weight loss surgery.

In the last few years, I've been increasingly disappointed in the quality of…well, now that I think of it, "fast food" isn't quite the right label. The kind of thing I'm thinking about is more like "pre-fab restaurant food." The fact that it's fast or even served in what we think of as a "fast food" ambiance isn't the problem. When I'm alone, I like eating swiftly and getting on to the next phase of my life. Running from meeting to meeting, it was handy to duck into a McDonald's or Sizzler and grab a quick meal.

But more and more, even before I significantly altered my eating habits, I was enjoying places like those and Arby's and KFC less and less. KFC has become especially awful and I don't think it's just me changing and losing my taste for deep-fried batter. I recall liking their food a lot back in the seventies, even back when Colonel Sanders was still alive. He was decrying how the company that had acquired his business had ruined the chicken, making it cheaper to prepare and simpler for a teenager earning minimum wage. The man whose face was on the bucket said it was lousy fried chicken and while I concurred it wasn't as good as it had been, it was still my best dining alternative at times.

I can't imagine what he'd think of the product today…and please remember I am not comparing it to gourmet foods made by a world-famous chef and priced much higher. I'm comparing it to what I used to get in the same garish-colored buildings a few decades earlier. There are health reasons not to patronize KFC and there are moral reasons having to do with the processing of their hens…and I don't have to even begin to sort those out because I stopped for a simpler reason: The chicken was, to me, inedible.

That's the most extreme example but I've also noticed a worsening of the cuisine, if you can call it that, at Arby's and Wendy's and McDonald's…and also at places that sorta resemble a real restaurant like Denny's or Sizzler or Fuddrucker's or Ihop. It isn't that they're chains. It's that they've configured — or in some cases, reconfigured — their product for consistency and ease of preparation. If there are people in the kitchen who know how to cook, they certainly don't have much room to flex those muscles. It's less a matter of freshness and more a matter of assembly.

There are, of course, exceptions. We have two West Coast chains that I like a lot — Koo Koo Roo and In-N-Out Burger, though I fear for both. Koo Koo Roo was acquired not long ago by the Fuddrucker's people and there's been a subtle drop in the quality since then. Meanwhile, the family that owns In-N-Out is currently undergoing some sort of upheaval and there are rumors they will soon abandon some of their principles and procedures in the interest of massive expansion.

Actually, I wouldn't mind losing the wonders of In-N-Out if someone would open a Five Guys outlet in my area. Five Guys is a Virginia-based chain that's now all up and down the East Coast. On our trip, Carolyn and I went to one in the firm's home state and I had one of the best hamburgers I've ever eaten and — probably — The Best French Fries. Like In-N-Out, they use real potatoes that are peeled on the premises, as well as beef that's never been frozen. Like In-N-Out, that's almost all they serve…and the food is surprisingly inexpensive. I've paid twenty bucks for a burger elsewhere that wasn't a tenth as good as what Five Guys (and for that matter, In-N-Out) sells for a tiny fraction of the price.

The secret to Five Guys fries seems to be not only the fresh spuds but that they fry in peanut oil. Some places don't, in part because they don't want to lose customers who are allergic to peanuts…or sued if someone has an attack and blames it on the meal. It has been claimed that commercial-grade peanut oil will not cause an allergic reaction in most people but everyone I know with a peanut sensitivity steers clear of goobers in any form. (In-N-Out uses plain vegetable oil.) Five Guys seems to have decided to just write off that section of the population in order to achieve the best french fry possible. In fact — and I'm guessing this is a deliberate move to alert such patrons — every Five Guys has big tubs around of peanuts in the shell and they're free for the nibbling. If that was the idea, it's pretty darned clever.

On the trip, I also had my first Chick-Fil-A sandwich…and I believe they also fry in peanut oil. Their fries are nothing special but I thought the sandwich was pretty good. The chicken tasted frozen and as I look over their website, it appears as if they're trying to give the impression that it isn't frozen chicken when, in fact, it is. Still, it was pleasant and the light batter on the fried breast was quite good. This chain is in Southern California but not in any location where I tend to travel so it was new to me. In fact, I was so new to Chick-Fil-A that it didn't dawn on me until I heard another patron ask for one that its name is pronounced, "chick filet." Duh.

None of this, obviously, is the healthiest food in the world for you. I have a friend who, even as you read this, is dispatching a hysterical e-mail to me decrying the ingestion of anything involving beef, frying or a server who wears a paper hat. He's probably right in some sense but I'm never going to eat the way this friend thinks everyone should eat…and I also don't eat much of this kind of food nowadays, especially when I'm home. The best I can do, for when I'm on the road, is to ferret out the better places and when I find one, pass it along.

I also don't think I'll be eating as many french fries in the next few months as I would have, had I not been introduced to Five Guys. It's the same as after the first time I had steak at Peter Luger's restaurant in Brooklyn. After that, I didn't eat steak as often elsewhere. I'd been spoiled. In fact, there's probably a great advertising slogan in there for some chain that stresses freshness: "Our food isn't spoiled so you will be."

Funny man, that Charles Nelson Reilly. And popular. He had an astounding career on Broadway and an even more impressive one on television, much of it playing himself on talk shows and game shows. He also did kid shows (Uncle Croc's Block and Lidsville) and commercials and he directed and did cartoon voices and just about everything. He had the reputation of being cranky and very difficult and occasionally out of his ever-lovin' mind…but all the same, he was quite beloved by those who knew him.

Not long ago, he toured for a time in an autobiographical one man show that I, alas, never got to see. It's the basis of a new documentary film about him and I've embedded the trailer below, plus there are more clips to watch on this website…

Andrew J. Bacevich is a professor at at Boston University who was usually described as a Conservative before he began speaking out and writing articles against the War in Iraq. Recently, his son was killed fighting in that action. On this Memorial Day, he reflects on his son's sacrifice and his own.

…but then you probably never knew I was gone. My friend Carolyn and I spent the last week in Washington, D.C. and Virginia. Two days in our nation's capital isn't much…though I think it's twice as long as John McCain was there in the month of May. I told people I was going there to impeach Alberto Gonzales because, well, someone has to. Alas, I never saw him or anyone else worth impeaching…although the Night Manager at the hotel in Virginia came close.

Carolyn wanted a couple of luggage racks for our room — you know, the kind you unfold and put your suitcase on. The Night Manager was shocked that we didn't have them and swore he'd find a couple and send them up. He didn't. We kept asking about them. He kept saying he'd get right on the matter. Finally, after the fourth or fifth time we asked, he sent someone to go to vacant rooms, grab up two luggage racks and take them to us. This person reported back to him that the other rooms didn't have luggage racks, either. It turns out this hotel doesn't have luggage racks in its rooms.

The Night Manager phoned to tell me this, voluntarily adding, "Boy, you learn something new every day. I've worked here two years and I never knew we don't have luggage racks. I've never gotten around to going in any of the rooms."

Go ahead. Tell me that isn't an impeachable offense.

Getting back to D.C.: If you think this website spends too much time canonizing dead people, you should see Washington. You can't take two steps without running in to a memorial to someone…especially war dead. There was something odd and sad about how much of the town is about soldiers who've died in the service of their country.

We took a bus tour and learned nothing about the inner workings of our government but the various tour guides (they swapped off) kept telling us over and over how John Adams used to go skinny-dipping in the Potomac in its less polluted days. One of the guides rattled off a list of semi-interesting nuggets of trivia but every other sentence he uttered was, "And that's just a little historic fact you can take back home with you." And about every twelfth historic fact he divulged was that John Adams liked to go skinny-dipping in the Potomac. I think that gives us all a better appreciation of our heritage.

I'm tired and there's unpacking to do so I'm going to knock off here, go to sleep and write more in the morning. In fact, I may serialize my report. Forgive any typos. Mark is weary.

Is there life after death? I don't know and neither do you. But there is one kind of immortality. According to this article, MySpace "won't delete a profile for inactivity, and it also won't let anyone else control a deceased member's profile." So you can kind of write your own online memorial or otherwise continue to communicate with the world. This applies to soldiers going off to fight in Iraq, too.

Cartoon time! The Max Fleischer studio made Gulliver's Travels in 1940. It wasn't the greatest animated feature ever made but it was reasonably popular…and a big reason was a character named Gabby. The Fleischer Brothers promptly spun him off into his own series of short cartoons and they made nine of them, of which this was the third. It's called All's Well and they spend most of the cartoon singing a tune of the same name which was also introduced in Gulliver's Travels. After Mr. Disney's success introducing "Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf?" in the first Three Little Pigs short, there were many animated attempts to use cartoons to "plug" a song into best-selling status…none, of course, as successful. This was just such an attempt and I don't think it's a coincidence that, like the Big Bad Wolf song, "All's Well" is one of those "Don't worry, everything will be fine" songs that America seemed to need in the thirties and early forties.

Gabby was voiced by Vance "Pinto" Colvig, who was also the voice of Goofy and several other memorable characters during his Disney years…including Practical Pig in the Three Little Pigs cartoons. He later originated the role of Bozo the Clown. It sounds like his voice was sped a bit for Gabby, which they didn't do often at Fleischer's because they liked to record the voices to picture after the animation was done. The baby voice sounds a lot like Mae Questel but I think it's Margie Hines. Here's the film — which, by the way, was released on January 17, 1941…

One year ago today, all 344 pounds of me woke up at 8 AM. I posted two items here on Ye Olde Weblog, then called a cab and went to a hospital where I underwent Gastric Bypass Surgery. How much have I lost? Well, it depends on how you do the math…

My highest-ever weight was around 365. In February of '06, as you may recall, I was hospitalized for four days with a nasty little thing called Cellulitis. (It's no fun. Try not to get it.)

At the time, I knew I was soon to undergo the weight-reduction operation and I also knew that after I had that procedure, I'd have to do without carbonated beverages, which had become way too big a component of my bloodstream. I'd been putting away around a six-pack per day of Pepsi, 7-Up or Ginger Ale and that sure didn't help my waist line. Based on my attempts to cut back, I believed it was an addiction that I wouldn't be able to kick; that I'd wind up shivering on the kitchen table, trying to go Cold Turkey and begging for just one teensy hit of cola. Then, during my stay at Cedars-Sinai, I was served no sodas, nor did I miss them. When I got out, I decided to see how long I could do without…and I haven't touched a drop since. So there was one big reason — along with wiser eating in general — that I dropped about twenty pounds between February and May. Those pounds went before the Gastric Bypass Surgery but they were not unrelated to it.

In the first 65 days following the surgery, I lost 65 pounds. It was kind of amazing.

No, I take that back. It wasn't "kind of" amazing. It was just plain Amazing, capital "A" and all. The Monday following G.B.S. Day, I tried on an old pair of pants I found in my closet and they didn't fit me at all. I decided to try them on every Monday until they fit. The following Monday, they fit. Three Mondays later, they didn't fit…but for another, happier reason.

Since then, my weight has fluctuated a lot, which my doctor says is perfectly normal. Some of the gains have been due to water retention and/or to fat turning to muscle. The lowest I've hit on my scale has been 245, just one maddening pound shy of an even hundred since the operation. I went briefly back up as high as 264 after that. I'm presently at 255 and my doctor thinks I'll eventually settle in somewhere in the 230-240 range, which is not bad considering my height (6'3") and my frame.

A (possibly) more important gauge: My blood pressure was way too high back when my weight was. As I lost weight, it also went down and around the time I hit 280 on the scale, my doctor had me start breaking my blood pressure medication pills, thereby halving the dosage. A few weeks ago, I was at the gym when I suddenly felt weak. My physical trainer there whipped out the necessary equipment, took my blood pressure and decided it was way too low. Low — can you believe it? The next day, my doctor took me off even the half-pills and today, my blood pressure is exactly where we want it.

Am I glad I had the surgery? Absolutely. There has not been one second — not even when looking at some pretty steep medical bills — when I regretted my decision. (You can do it without huge expense if you have a decent health plan but I went the more expensive, upscale route for some elements of the process. There are things in this world you just don't want to skimp on…)

Do I recommend it to others? Absolutely not. I'm no expert on this but I've learned enough to realize my experience is not typical. Owing to an excellent surgeon and a trusted personal physician, and to the fact that — weight aside — I was in pretty good health before the operation, I had about as good an experience as is humanly possible. It simply doesn't go as smoothly for some people, including a nice lady who had the same surgery in the same hospital at the same time I did. We've been corresponding since then and while she doesn't regret the surgery either, she's had a lot of problems, including two more hospital stays, one of which involved additional surgery. That does happen and anyone who doesn't warn you of that is doing you a disservice. There are people who have the surgery and feel they are worse off. There are also a few who die.

I recommend that anyone who fits into that ominously-named category — The Morbidly Obese — at least investigate it. Most hospitals that perform the procedure have some sort of free, no-obligation orientation program that explains what it involves and I'd suggest visiting one. You can do a certain amount of research on the Internet but I found that the details can vary from surgeon to surgeon and information can go out of date faster than the websites are updated. The technology is advancing at a rapid clip so it's better to go in, hear the current lecture and see the current PowerPoint presentation and, of course, ask questions. If nothing else, you may find it interesting to not only learn about it but to be among other people with a similiar problem. At the meeting I attended, I was the skinniest attendee in the room.

If your inquiry raises any doubts in your mind, and it may, you probably shouldn't do it. I'd also suggest making sure you have a great personal physician — quite independent of anyone who'd be involved in the surgery — to guide you. If you don't have such a doctor in your life, find one before you commit to weight-loss surgery. I think it helps a lot to be so sure you're doing the right thing that you aren't the least bit scared.

Most of all, I'd suggest you at least consider the following…

There are eight thousand ways out there to lose weight…pills, diet foods, fat farms, exercise regimens, ways to better measure your calorie intake, etc. Some of these work for a lot of people and you should probably exhaust all reasonable possibilities before you even consider surgery. Then — and only then — if none of them work for you, you should not be ashamed or afraid to at least look into what I had done. You never know.

I'm convinced that ads and experts that insist anyone can lose weight through more conventional methods are fibbing or at least benevolently wrong. Some people can't lose sufficient poundage via Weight Watchers or Jenny Craig or Nutri-System or whatever Richard Simmons is currently peddling…or even doctor-prescribed nutrition and exercise programs. Some of those things strike me as making you lighter only to the extent they reduce your wallet. If one works for you, great. That's the way to do it. If not, don't let them take your will and your personal esteem along with the money.

I went public with my experience because, well, first of all, I figured (I hoped) people would notice. Some don't. Some acquaintances actually look at me and go, "You changed your hair, right?" Most, of course, do notice and it was easier to explain it here than to explain it over and over to all of them. But also, I thought it might be of value to someone. If it didn't work out for me, I could be a great cautionary example. ("I was going to have Gastric Bypass Surgery but then I read on Evanier's site that his ass fell off and now he has to blog standing up!") And of course, if it did work for me, I could perhaps inspire someone else to consider it or, preferably, less drastic methods. I hope this has.

It's really been an extraordinary year, getting back some of my old sense of balance, sitting in chairs without worrying about them breaking, discovering that aches that I thought were old age were actually just joints swollen from too much pasta. And then there have been the little moments…

I keep getting called to do video interviews that go on DVDs. A few weeks ago, I did one and I was in the make-up chair, allowing a nice lady to apply a thin film of Max Factor to my puss. She asked me if I had an older brother. I said no, I'm an only child. She said, "I was just wondering. About a year ago, I made up a guy who looked a lot like you only he was much older and a lot fatter…"

This is from the New York Times/CBS News poll…

More Americans — 72 percent — now say that "generally, things in the country are seriously off on the wrong track" than at any time since the Times/CBS News poll began asking the question in 1983. The figure had been in the high 60's earlier this year.

But the poll results made clear that the war continues to be the issue Americans are most worried about. Sixty-one percent of respondents now say that the United States should never have taken military action against Iraq, up from 51 percent in a CBS News poll in April and 58 percent in the same poll in January. Seventy-six percent say that things are going badly in the effort to bring stability and order to Iraq, including 47 percent who say they're going very badly.

You notice you don't hear George W. Bush saying, "Stay the course" much these days? Wonder why that is.

These kids today and their music! You can't even understand the lyrics. Why can't they enjoy sensible songs like this classic sung by The KingsMen?

You may have heard that "new scientific findings" cast doubt on the theory (and the belief of some of us) that Lee Harvey Oswald was the lone shooter of a Mr. J. F. Kennedy back in '63. I've been reading the articles — like this one — and have come to the conclusion that this new revelation is being hyped, as headline writers tend to do, beyond its merits. One of many pieces of evidence in the assassination investigation was a test that determined that the bullet fragments that were recovered all came from one rifle — Oswald's. What the new study suggests is not that the fragments definitely came from multiple weapons. That's what some of the headlines would lead you to believe…and of course, that would be a much bigger, important story. What the new study says is that the test that was performed may not have been as accurate as we believed.

Okay, fine. May not have been. It also may have come to the right answer. The whole thing is full of "may have"s and "could have"s and nothing that says with any certainty that the fragments didn't come from the one Mannlicher-Carcano. It's an important fact to add to the pile but it sure doesn't prove anything…except maybe that news editors like to hype stories out of proportion. Like we needed any further proof of that.

I read this over on Andrew Sullivan's weblog. A reader sent it in and it's so perfect that I decided to quote it here…

Bush said today that we should expect an escalation of violence in Iraq because the enemy know that September is a key date for political opinion. So, let me get this straight: if there is less violence, it obviously means the surge is working, and if there is more violence it means the enemy is desperate to get us out and the surge is working. And the two people who get to decide if the surge is working are the architect of the surge (Petraeus) and the man who gave the surge the go-ahead (Bush). What are the odds we'll hear in September that the surge is not working?

And while you're in that neighborhood, read what Sullivan has to say about a recent campaign appearance by Barack Obama.

Another Fred Kaplan link on Iraq. Just go read it.

Next Wednesday night at the Comedy & Magic Club in Hermosa Beach, Jay Leno will headline a show to raise cash for…well, here's the announcement from the website…

Help Jay raise money for some of your favorite older comics who through their humor and laughter have helped many of us through tough times — and now this time they need our help.

That's obviously commendable and I'm sure it'll be a great show and a great cause…but I can't resist adding this: I think I know who a couple of those "older comics" are. And while some money will sure aid them, what would really aid at least one or two of those guys is to be booked to perform on The Tonight Show with Jay Leno. Not all older comedians are still up to that…but some are. Jay could do a lot to counter the mindset on TV and in clubs that you only want to hire the young, up-and-coming comics. But he'd need to lead by example.