Monthly Archives: September 2010

It's been disturbing to see an insignificant pastor in Florida, the head of a church of no stature, holding the nation and media hostage with his threat of a big Koran bonfire. Is it now that easy for anyone to command the attention of the world and to do something that will change world opinion of America? If I get fifty friends together and threaten to torch someone else's holy books, do I get that much airtime and calls from important people? Wow.

I just saw our president's news conference in which he repeated the points that the proposed conflagration is (a) not what America is all about and (b) likely to endanger our troops. Both are valid but I wish he'd put a little more emphasis on (a) than (b). And of course, the big trouble with all this is that it is presently U.S. policy — started by Bush, continued by Obama and pretty much the last remaining justification for the Iraq War — that we are now trying to reach out to peaceful, reasonable Muslims. Burning their holy volumes and promoting Islamophobia might not be the best way to accomplish this.

And I find myself concurring with Glenn Greenwald that there's something amiss when we warn that this one wacko padre may wind up with blood on his hands but give a pass to so many who are dripping red and white corpuscles. We have this odd selective outrage in this country. It's been more than five years since the most important thing to some was that the heart of a woman named Terri Schiavo keep beating. How many other Terri Schiavos have died since then in like scenarios (or because they didn't have decent insurance) without any of those folks caring in the least?

If you love Harpo Marx, you're going to have a great time prowling around a new Harpo Site, kind of an online museum being operated by Harpo's son, Bill. Bill's a great guy and this is a great website and stop reading this message and go look around.

And if you don't love Harpo Marx…well, I really don't want to know you then and don't care what you do.

My friends in Los Angeles need to be aware of this. You know how if you parked at a parking meter and the meter turned out to be broken, you didn't have to pay? Well, you may not have known that but it doesn't matter. That's not how it works anymore. They're installing new, solar-powered meters and if you park at one and you can't put a coin in, you'll get a ticket. That's going to be real annoying.

I don't know how often this has happened: I'm going somewhere, fretting I'll be tardy for an important appointment…and there's no place to park. Around and around I drive, the level of fret increasing…

And then I spot an empty parking space!

I pull in, probably doing one of those time-consuming parallel jobs. I turn off my engine, unbuckle the old seat belt, gather what I need to gather, get out, head for the meter with coins in hand —

— and the meter's busted.

Now, I knew that in L.A. you didn't have to pay then but sometimes this happens in an outlying area like Santa Monica…and I'm not certain it's not different there. Sometimes also, I can't see why the meter isn't working and I fear it'll be fine once I leave my car there and go off…and I'll return to a ticket. Once in a while, I'll get back in the car and go off to find another space…and I realize that the reason that space was empty was because someone else either thought like I did or didn't know that it's ever legal to park at a busted meter.

Well, now it's not. So what's going to happen is that those spaces will be vacant and we'll all pull our cars into them, turn off our engines, unbuckle our seat belts, etc. — and then find out that the meter's broken and we can't park there. Like I said, that's going to be real annoying.

The anniversary of 9/11 is coming up. This weblog shall show its respect for the tragedy of that day by not doing a single thing here to exploit its memory to sway public opinion or raise money. Thank you.

Consumer Reports rated fast food burgers and here's what they and their readers decided. In-N-Out and Five Guys tied for first place followed closely by Fuddruckers and a couple of places I've never tried. McDonald's fared especially poorly, finishing well behind even Jack-in-the-Box, Burger King, Wendy's, Carl's Jr and White Castle.

Not that anyone's opinion matters but yours on a topic like this but I much prefer Five Guys to In-N-Out. I used to really like In-N-Out but my last half-dozen visits have all been disappointing and I've been wondering if they've changed or I have. Since their sales seem to be higher than ever, I'm guessing it's me. I'm not a big fan of McDonald's except that there are times, especially at airports, when they're just plain dependable and convenient…and maybe unavoidable. I still prefer them to Burger King and Jack-in-the-Box by a wide margin…and the last two times I went to Carl's Jr were the last two times I'll ever go to Carl's Jr. I like Wendy's, and White Castle struck me as a fun place to eat…once. (In light of McDonald's low rating, I assume none of the voters were factoring french fries into their evaluations. Five Guys really leaves In-N-Out in the dust if you're taking fries into account.)

By the way: If you do have to eat at a McDonald's, the best hamburger I've found there is the Quarter Pounder without cheese. This requires a bit of explanation. Once upon a time, you could go to a McDonald's and order a Quarter Pounder with or without cheese and they had both ready-made and rarin' to go…and probably sitting there for five or ten minutes before you ordered. At some point, they stopped pre-making them without cheese so now it's a special order and if you're lucky, they'll grill up a fresh (i.e., frozen) patty just for you. Any McDonald's hamburger has its shortcomings but they're all a lot better in the unlikely event you get them hot off the grill.

Thanks to Vince Waldron for letting me know about this survey. The gesture of my friend Vince is all the more touching when I consider that he's a vegetarian.

Hendrik Hertzberg on the price of the Iraq War.

The last time here I wondered aloud about what the war had accomplished, I received two long e-mails from servicemen — one still in Iraq, one now over in Afghanistan, explaining Iraq from their viewpoints. They seemed to have been fighting completely different wars for different purposes and with different results.

I'm linking to this in large part because so many of you have sent me the link. TV scribe Fred S. Fox wrote the famous episode of Happy Days wherein Fonzie water-ski jumped over a shark. This triggered, years later, a phrase that entered popular speech — "jumped the shark." Mr. Fox is right that folks are misremembering if they think that scenario marked the demise of the series.

Here's a clip I can't embed but it's sure worth a trip over to YouTube to hear it. It's audio only of the first three minutes of Johnny Carson's first Tonight Show for October 1, 1962.

Quick explanation: At the time, the Tonight Show was an hour and forty-five minutes in some markets, 90 in others. This was because some stations ran a 15-minute late newscast before it and some had a half-hour. So the show would start at 11:15 (10:15 Central) and they'd do whatever they did, going to a commercial break at 11:28 or so. When they came back from that break, the show would have another opening billboard and it would more-or-less start over for those just joining it. Once Johnny was ensconced as host, he'd do his opening monologue in the first fifteen minutes and do some comedy bit or maybe even have on a first guest who was expendable for much of the country.

But Johnny felt his monologue wasn't expendable. Later on when he was successful and had some clout, he began to object to the arrangement. He stopped doing the first fifteen minutes of his own show, leaving that to Ed McMahon and bandleader Skitch Henderson. They'd host that part and then Johnny would appear at 11:30 and do his monologue for the full roster of stations. Eventually, the first fifteen went away completely.

On his first night, they wanted all of America to see his debut so Groucho Marx came in, did the first fifteen minutes and then introduced Johnny. And you'll hear that intro if you click here. I didn't know this still existed and I am, of course, curious if the rest of this episode does.

The other day I wrote the following here: "Even if you constantly produce quality material on time, there's another very good reason why you might not get hired or be able to sell what you write or draw. It's the same reason good, reliable actors are often unemployed." And I promised to elaborate. This is that elaboration…

Basically, the reason is that the amount of opportunities is finite but the number of applicants is not.

For the purposes of this discussion, I'm going to lump together people who want to write, people who want to draw, people who want to act, people who want to play major league baseball…all those professions where in one way or another, you audition and if the right person says, "Hey, you're the one," you get paid to do what you want to do. There are obviously differences between those professions but they share this in common: Lots of people want to do them and there can never be enough opportunities for them all. The roster of a professional baseball team is limited to 25 players. Obviously, there are a lot more than 25 people who dream of playing for the Yankees. Some of them may be extremely skilled but they're going to get turned away because the team can only accommodate 25 of them.

People who aspire to such jobs often forget this. They think of it as a contest: Can they prove they're good enough to get the person or persons who makes/make the selection think they're good? Yes, that's the game but it's only part of it. Because most of the time when you succeed at that, others have as well. You're not the only victor. The hiring entity has ten or twenty good people and one job…and that's when it comes down to whims or going eenie-meenie-minie-mo. Too many people, not enough openings.

The system by which such jobs are awarded is a subjective, unpredictable one. You and/or your work are evaluated. Someone makes a judgment based on taste or hunches or whatever. But no matter what criteria they use, no matter how they go about deciding who they want, there are this many people and that many jobs, and at some level, there's nothing you can do about that. Each year, 53 beautiful women are finalists in the Miss America pageant. Each year, 52 beautiful women don't win and wonder, "Why couldn't it have been me?" And the answer is that it probably could have been but 52 had to lose. It's not like the one who won is the only good-looking one in the crowd. They're all gorgeous. They all pretty much fit the criteria via which the decision is made. But there can only be one Miss America per year, at least until the nude photos surface.

I occasionally find myself in a hiring position and I don't enjoy it. Actually, I enjoy the hiring part but I really, really hate the calls and e-mails and not-so-subtle hints from friends that result in me having to say, "Sorry, there's no opening." That is much more often the case than, "Sorry, you're not good enough." Usually, it doesn't even get as far as me deciding if the person can do the job. I've already filled it so I don't have to decide if each new applicant is the best choice. But I know that usually doesn't satisfy them…and some of them get very frustrated or even angry.

If you make the decision that your profession is going to be one of those where you have to keep auditioning, literally or implicitly, it sure helps to understand that it will involve this Luck of the Draw. Being great at what you do doesn't get you jobs. It puts you in the first tier for selection, along with a batch of other folks who are great, for when there are jobs. To get angry or frustrated at this system is silly. It's like an unemployed plumber getting mad because not enough people have dripping sinks this week. If you can't accept this, you're just going to make yourself unhappy…and/or spend a lot of time trying to change a situation that you're powerless to change.

Vern Morrison did some research and determined that the correct date of this morning's Johnny Carson clip is Thursday, January 9, 1964. Thanks, Vern.

I just noticed that the banks are closed today, there's no mail delivery and most folks have the day off. I'm impressed…all that just because it's Sergio's birthday!