Category Archives: To Be Filed

Even if you're not supporting Bernie Sanders, this oughta put a smile on your face. It's Dick Van Dyke (age 90) dancing when he introduced Senator Sanders at a rally the other day…

Donald Trump thinks we should "look into" an old allegation against Bill Clinton of rape. Joe Conason thinks that if we do, we should also "look into" an old allegation against Donald Trump of rape.

I must say that one of the weaselier tricks in Trump's arsenal is raising questions that others are supposedly asking. It's one thing to say "I believe Bill Clinton (or Hillary or Bernie or anyone) has done this awful thing and here's why I believe it…" That may be promoting a lie but at least you're taking responsibility for your own accusation. When you say, "Some people are saying this…I dunno…I'm just asking questions," that's real craven. And it's pretty irresponsible to try and spread a charge like that if you really and truly don't know anything about it.

Hey, everybody! It's Part 11 in my series of articles about how writers can deal with no one wanting to pay them to write. Part 1 can be read here, Part 2 can be read here, Part 3 can be read here, Part 4 can be read here, Part 5 can be read here, Part 6 can be read here, Part 7 can be read here, Part 8 can be read here, Part 9 can be read here and Part 10? Well, Part 10 can be read here. Part 11 can be read right after I skip a line…

---

There. Here we are at Part 11 and this time, let's talk about money. Writers need to make money. That might seem obvious but it apparently isn't to the myriad of people we encounter who expect us to write for them for little or no cash because, after all, we're artists and we are primarily motivated by passion for our work and a burning need to express ourselves. Nary a week goes by where someone doesn't approach me, trying to finagle me into writing something for little or no remuneration. Here is a list of key points that writers need to remember about their profession…

1. It is vital to make a decent living, one which allows you and your loved ones (if any) to live in a safe environment with sufficient food, medical care and other necessities of life.

There are other key points but that one's so important that I'm going to skip the others.  You need those things I just mentioned and you also need some bucks in the bank for emergencies or lean times — oh, and clothing might be nice, too. And maybe a car and gas to run it. And the tools with which to write and you can probably think of other must-haves. The fact that you're a professional writer — or someone who longs to be one — does not change that. Not in any way. If you're nervous that you won't sell the script you're now writing, just think unsettling your sleep will be if a non-sale of that script would cause you to lose your home.

It should not come to that. When you're on the ledge is when you're liable to make really, really bad career decisions. As a writer, you'll probably get lots of offers you should decline. You should say no to insulting pay rates and to projects for which you have zero passion. You should especially turn down those Jobs From Hell where you'll be working for some guy who combines the worst traits of the Tasmanian Devil, Vlad the Impaler and Phil Spector. That's why you need money in the bank. You can't pass on a job when they're dangling the bucks you need to not get evicted this week.

There may also be times in your life when you want to work on a play or a novel or some idea you have which could result in the creation of something wonderful which you'll then go out and try to sell. To write that dream project, you may need to turn down some paying work, which may mean living for a time off your savings. You can't live off your savings if you don't have savings.

So do not be afraid of making money. Money can be very empowering. For one thing, it frees you from having to worry about money.

Now, am I suggesting that if you're a writer and you aren't making enough to live on, you go get a job waiting tables or selling pants or driving for Uber? Well, that might not be the worst idea in the world but wouldn't it be better to get a job writing?

Not being able to pay your bills as a writer may not be a problem of talent as much as of timing. Some publisher might read that spec novel of yours next week, decide you're the next Stephen King and agree to lay a big advance on you. Or it might be eighteen months before you connect with that person and he gets around to reading it…oh, and the advance will be paid six months later. I just thought of another key point that writers need to remember about their profession…

2. The money almost always takes longer to arrive than you'd like and longer than you'd expect. This is obviously true with shady or underfunded producers and publishers but it's also true of honest ones who are flush with cash.

Right there's another reason why you shouldn't try to live from check to check. I knew a writer years ago who was owed a huge, six-figure payment from Universal Pictures. No one disputed it was due him or questioned the amount. It just somehow took six weeks for someone there to issue the check and during that time, he had to borrow money to live on until it arrived.

If you have to go look for a job because you don't have a check like that en route to you, why not look for a writing job? One that may not be what you eventually want to do but which can keep you solvent until you get to it?

When I started out, I wrote for local magazines. I wrote press releases for a publicist. I wrote one semi-naughty novel under a fake name. I wrote speeches for people who were willing to pay to have speeches written for them. I ghost-wrote some advertising work for another writer I knew. It was not the kind of writing I wanted to do but it was writing.

Then I began writing comic books…and yes, I know there are folks reading this who'd think they'd found their calling if they could write comic books 'til they were as old as Stan Lee but this was 1970. Comics then didn't pay that well and the folks who'd then been doing them for most of their lives didn't seem all that happy about it or properly rewarded. Even Stan Lee then wasn't too happy about it or properly rewarded. It was a great job for me though. I was fast and I was learning and I was still living with my parents and I was young and I was getting my work published in a professional situation and I never had to wait tables or stock shelves or run a deep fryer.

I'm not in any way knocking people who do do those jobs. It's just that if your goal is to be a writer, most non-writing jobs don't get you any closer to that goal. The less glamorous/lucrative writing gigs do however give you some money and also some experience writing. You learn about how to set up your work area. You learn how to pace yourself at the keyboard or whether it helps you to write out things in longhand first. You get practice formulating a sentence in your head and then transferring it to the manuscript. You learn that you write better when you arrange your day so you go to bed early and get up early to write…or write until early in the morning and then sleep 'til 3 in the afternoon.

Also, I think there's a skill to meeting a deadline — learning how to budget your time, learning how often to take a break, etc. You can cultivate a sense of when it's going too slowly or too rapidly. If it's going too slowly, you may not have time to keep to that pace. If it's going surprisingly swiftly, you may need to pause and decide if the speed is because you're really, really in the zone or really, really off-course. It's probably one or the other.

I learned — and this is just me I'm talking about here — that it didn't work to write out much of an outline or even notes for myself; that I had to work it out in my head and store it there. I can't tell you why but that's the way I learned I did my best work. I'd think through my story, often during a long walk, and get it to a certain stage of completeness. Only then could I sit down at what was then a manual typewriter and begin filling the paper. There was such a thing as thinking it through insufficiently and there was also such a thing as too much. I developed an instinct as to when I had the right level.

That level changed over the years as I got a better sense of my own strengths and weaknesses and it changed a lot more when I segued into writing on a computer. But the point is I had to know how to figure out where I was doing to go and roughly how I was going to get there before I began putting things down in what I hoped would be their final form.

And then there was the most serious thing of all, perhaps: I had to develop a sense of when what I was putting on the paper was going nowhere or was not up to whatever standard I wished to meet. I had to be able to sense I'd made one or more wrong turns and I had to learn to make the sacrifice of figuratively (sometimes, literally) tearing up the last few pages or maybe even all of them. That is sometimes a hard thing for any writer to do, especially when you think there's some good stuff in there and now no one will ever read or hear it.

None of this is unique to me. Every writer has to go through certain areas of self-discovery and to find out how best to do what they want to do. I know writers, many of whom I respect a lot, who do their work in ways that seem alien to me.

They get up at dawn and never write after the sun goes down. Or they have to physically leave their homes and go to an office somewhere to write. They require certain music playing at a certain volume. Or they demand absolute silence. They need the phone turned off and little chance of interruption. Or they need to not have the sense of total isolation that can come from being totally isolated. They write out long pages by hand on yellow legal pads, then edit and refine as they type it into their computers. Or they can't write on Microsoft Word, they have to use some version of Wordstar from the Bronze Age with certain tab stops and margins. I even know a few writers who can't use computers at all and so produce magic on the kind of primitive manual typewriter that I wrote on at age 14.

There's nothing wrong with any of that…if it works for you. As a writer, you no doubt have one or more dream assignments — things you want to write, jobs you want to get. If and when you get a shot at them, you'd better have all the basics mastered. That is no time to be figuring out how to set up your office or to learn Movie Master Screenwriter or how to write out an outline for yourself.

Now, you may notice that in this piece, I have subtly changed topics on you. It started out to be a piece about how as writer, you need to earn a comfy living and not always be worrying about your electricity being turned off or the Visa people sending a S.W.A.T. team over to surround your home and order you to throw their credit card out the window. It has since morphed into an essay about the importance for a writer to become comfy and efficient writing and to learn how to be productive and meet a deadline.

I did that little switch because I think these are two problems with the same solution: If you can't get the writing position of your dreams, get a lesser one to tide you over. Find a magazine to write for or find an ad agency that needs someone to whip up press releases or go out and write porn (a lot of successful writers have at one time or another) or write pamphlets or ad copy or training manuals or whatever else may be out there.

If you think it would be embarrassing, you don't have to put your name on it, don't have to tell your friends about it. Just make sure it pays and it would also be good if it requires you to write something — anything — and to deliver it on a timely, professional basis.

Don't think of it as admitting defeat because you aren't writing major motion pictures or showrunning a hit TV show or getting your plays produced on Broadway. Think of it as temp work that can help you out financially for a while and prevent you from having to take a job that does not relate in the slightest to what you really want to do. The money from that temp job might save your home and give you enough of a safety net that you can spend more time writing and less time fretting over bills. And the disciplines and experience of that temp job just might help you to someday use that more writing time to write that major motion picture, showrun that hit TV show, get those plays produced on Broadway…

In February of this year, the animation community and everyone who ever knew Joe Alaskey were saddened to hear of Joe's passing at the age of 64. As I wrote at the time…

Joe was an on-camera impressionist and comic actor but he achieved his greatest fame doing voices for animated cartoons, including the role of Grandpa Lou Pickles on Rugrats (following the late David Doyle) and many of the major Warner Brothers characters, especially Daffy Duck. Joe won his Emmy in 2004 for his portrayal of Daffy on the series, Duck Dodgers.

This afternoon, friends and family members gathered together at Joe's favorite restaurant out in Encino (this place) and told wonderful stories about him, then we ate wonderful food that Joe would have been happy to know his loved ones were eating. I was one of the speakers and like those who preceded and followed me, I spoke of a wonderfully talented man who was passionate about his work and who did it so well. (One of those who followed me was Bob Bergen, who speaks for Porky Pig usually and who did in the Duck Dodgers show. So you had Daffy's loyal assistant eulogizing Daffy…sort of.)

If I'd taken notes, I could maybe quote some of the great stories told but I'm a lousy reporter and I was enjoying myself too much to think about that. It was just plain great to spend a little more time with Joe and to hear others' experiences with him. Mine were all wonderful — like the time I had him on a Cartoon Voice Panel at Comic-Con. As I usually do, I asked all the panelists to tell us of some job they had for which they received no billing or attention…something we might be surprised to know they did.

Joe must have had thousands to pick from but he mentioned that he had looped (i.e., replaced the voice of) Jack Lemmon in a few scenes of the movie of Glengarry Glen Ross. I believe it was for the "laundered" version of the film for when it was shown on TV or airplanes or something. Anyway, he went in and imitated Lemmon and redid every line with a naughty word in it…which now that I think of it may have been half the movie. Then he demonstrated for us a flawless mimicking of Mr. Lemmon's voice.

We did not plan the follow-up. I remembered that the first time I'd seen Joe — he was doing stand-up on some TV show — I was impressed by an uncanny facsimile he did of the voice of Walter Matthau. I asked him if he ever did Lemmon and Matthau together, as heard in the film of The Odd Couple.

I don't know if the audience saw this but I sure saw Joe look for a moment like I'd thrown him a high inside slider curve. This was instantly followed by a twinkle of pleasure at the challenge and then I saw Joe's face scrunch like he was rapidly fast forwarding through his memory, running the whole damn movie so he could select a choice exchange. Less than five seconds after I'd asked, Joe performed about a six-line excerpt playing both Walter/Oscar and Jack/Felix. It was dead-on perfect and the audience gasped, then lustily applauded.

Audiences fake applause all the time. We applaud when someone is introduced even when we have no idea who that is. But we don't fake gasping. Three thousand people at that moment gasped aloud at the awesome talent of Mr. Joe Alaskey. And well they should.

It was a great party, Joe. Sorry you weren't there…but I guess, in a way, you were.

There are a number of companies like Reelin' in the Years which collect and license video footage for commercial use. They don't sell to private collectors but they market the material for specials and home video releases and for use on other shows and such. They've been offering the archives of The Merv Griffin Show and now they're handling The David Frost Show.

Frost hosted this series on American TV from 1969 to 1972 — and it got a certain amount of publicity due to the fact that he simultaneously lived in and did another show in Great Britain. He would literally make a transatlantic commute each week to the U.S., tape several shows, then fly home. I believe in the middle of doing all that, he even went to Hollywood for a few days and did an episode of Here's Lucy wherein Lucille Ball's character was hired to accompany him on those flights and guard him from intrusions so he could sleep.

Frost's U.S. talk show came about because Merv Griffin, who was a hit with one in syndication, accepted a deal from CBS to do a late night network show opposite Johnny Carson. Group W, which had syndicated Griffin's show, hurriedly threw together a show with Frost to offer to stations which now had that hole to fill in their schedules. The Frost show was 90 minutes but was also offered in a 60 minute version that ran in some markets.

The emphasis on the Frost show was less on comedy than on hard-hitting interviews and his producers did manage some incredible guest bookings, as you'll see in this sizzle reel. I hope some cable channel starts airing these programs in their entirety…

Our pal Joe Brancatelli writes about what a mess the T.S.A. has become at airports. And Joe makes a good point: Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton aren't talking about this because they don't have to wait in line for three hours and still miss their flights.

Jonathan Chait points out how adept Trump is at lying and more or less getting away with it. It's amazing to me — and maybe even kinda impressive in a way — that he can do this without his devoted followers becoming any less devoted. And at the same time, they insist Hillary will say anything to get elected.

I missed noting an important day in my life yesterday. Ten years ago yesterday, I checked into a hospital and had the size of my stomach reduced via Gastric Bypass Surgery. I have done many foolish things in my life but this was not one of them. Since then, I have been thinner and healthier and I'd say I was happier but I've always been pretty happy so I'll just say I've been happier with myself.

I started to write a little essay reflecting on the operation, then paused to look up what I'd written here on the fifth anniversary and I'm not sure I can improve on this…

Five years ago today, I had Gastric Bypass Surgery. It was all part of my continuing effort to persuade my stomach to withdraw to its 1967 borders.

I have not written a lot about it here in the last few years because I thought it would bore those of you who aren't considering such a procedure and it might mislead any of you who are. I really and truly had an ideal experience with no real discomforts or complications, and I don't want anyone to take the plunge, thinking they'll have as easy a time of it as I did.

I'm still in touch with a lady who had it done at the same moment and she's had a helluva time, including three follow-up surgeries and a lot of hospitalization and physical problems. Still, she says she does not regret doing it since what she would have experienced without it would have been worse…and not just because that might have included death. Others who've had it done, I'm sure, may feel they would have lived longer and happier without it.

My weight still fluctuates within about a twenty pound range which doesn't seem to have a lot to do with what I eat. It probably has more to do with how often I get up from this here computer and go out for a long walk. At the moment, I'm inching downwards. I've lost about ten in the last month. I'll go up, I'll go down but the general trajectory has been very, very slowly down. That's a bit of a disappointment after the immediate results of the surgery. I lost the first 65 pounds in the first 65 days.

Almost immediately, I began to sleep less and better. I eat less…and find that many of the foods I used to eat are no longer as appealing. High on that list is anything with a lot of sugar in it. In January of '08, my sweet tooth inexplicably disappeared and I no longer had any interest in cookies, cake, ice cream or even fruit. I am told this is not usually or even often a side effect of G.B.S. and could even be unrelated. At the same time as the pleasure from sugar disappeared, my list of acceptable beverages dropped down to water and almost nothing else. I do have the occasional protein shake and even those can't have sugar in them. Never having cared for artificial sweeteners, I use a protein drink flavored with Stevia.

I could go on and on about the health benefits of what I had done but I won't because someone reading this might become convinced to try it based on my experience…and then they might not have my experience. I've learned enough about this process to know that many, perhaps most do not. I do suggest that if it sounds like something you need, you look into it. You'll need to weigh the costs and risks and benefits, all of which may be unique to you, and then decide.

It helps an awful lot to have a great personal physician — someone you really trust — and you should go to a really good surgeon, preferably someone your physician knows and recommends. Clearly, there are a lot of doctors and clinics out there doing this procedure who should not be doing it and I'd be especially wary of those who advertise lap bands like some new cell phone rate plan. Heck, I'd be wary of those who advertise at all. But the main thing is to do the research…and then have the surgery, if you have the surgery, because you decide and not because someone nudges you into it.

All of that is, of course, common sense. So is the simple premise that if you can lose the weight without surgery, you should.

I couldn't. My physician (who sadly, is no longer my physician because he's now on special assignment, doing amazing missions for your United States Government) guided me through several attempts, then concluded they would not work for me. He had a whole technical explanation that I will muck up if I attempt to replicate it here. It had to do with my blood sugar levels and a tendency for my body to retain amounts of water that equalled the capacity of Lake Michigan.

So five years ago at this moment, I was sitting in the waiting room over at Cedars-Sinai Hospital — or as most people call it, Cedar-Sinai. I was waiting for a 10 AM surgery that didn't happen until…well, they started jointly prepping me and the lady I mentioned above around 1 PM and we went under our respective knives in adjoining operating rooms around 2. Only they didn't use knives for the serious stuff, at least with me. It was laparoscopic surgery, which means they make tiny incisions which heal invisibly. When you sign the consent form, you give them permission to switch to the old-fashioned, cut-you-open path if the presiding surgeon suddenly decides it's necessary…so when a patient awakens after, the first thing most of them ask was, "Were they able to do it laparoscopically?"

That's apparently not what I asked. A nurse in the recovery room told me I asked, "Can we send out for pizza?" That sounds like me and I'm sure I meant it as a joke.

But this kind of surgery is not a joke. It's pretty darned serious, which is why I never want to encourage anyone to do more than look into it…and to not trust just anyone who's available or affordable. And like I said, if you can drop a hundred or more pounds without it, by all means go that route. I have only envy for those who can do it themselves.

Not much I can add to that except to say that I'm still very glad I did it and cannot think of a single thing about my health that worsened. Had I done it years earlier, I might not have needed my right knee replaced last year — another bit of surgery I have not regretted in the slightest. I will say though that I think both good experiences had a lot to do with connecting with real good doctors who were experts at what they did.

Which makes me think of one bit of advice I should include: The Internet is a great place to gather info but only if you know how to ignore info. There's a ton out there of the anecdotal variety and it may do more harm than good. If I'd hit certain websites — or listened to certain "friends" — I might have gone into those two surgeries with a lot of misinformation or needless worries. No matter what you're thinking of having done to yourself, there's someone out there with a story of how it killed their uncle.

Do not base your medical decisions on someone else's story of how it worked for them or didn't work for them. There are outliers in every category and of course, what helped me might not help you and vice-versa. I think one of the smarter things I did in both cases — the Gastric Bypass and the Knee Replacement — was not to tell everyone (or post about them here) before I did them. I consulted several doctors I trusted, matched up things they all told me, used a little of what I sure hope was common sense…and made my decisions.

On the 'net, you can find sites that will tell you Donald Trump was personally hand-picked by Almighty God to come and save the United States from the utter devastation wrought by the Gay Kenyan Obama. It doesn't make a lot of sense to get your medical information via the same browser.

This is a rerun of one of the first videos I ever embedded on this site. I think it's still funny and its message grows ever more relevant to the world in which we live…

Mike Martin sent me an e-mail with subject line "What would Jack think?" It's about a new storyline that Marvel has going with Captain America…

So, obviously the fan base is up in arms about Marvel's new "not a gimmick" that Captain America has been a deep cover Hydra agent all along (so deep that he has prevented their world conquering plans multiple times, apparently). At times, you have quoted Jack Kirby as saying (and I'm paraphrasing) that he didn't mind what later creators did with his characters because that was their take on the subject and it didn't invalidate his work.

But I'm wondering if this storyline's claim that "he has been a Hydra agent all along" might be a bridge too far, since it essentially injects this new take on the character into his entire 75 year history. What are your thoughts?

I haven't seen the comics but I would say it is a "gimmick" the way I define that word, maybe not the way the comic's makers do. It's become very popular in comics — and to see why, you just have to look at the sales figures — to come up with these character-changing events. Some character dies. Some character marries. Some character gets a new costume, thereby abandoning an iconic one. Some character loses a limb or key power or otherwise undergoes a startling change. Some character gets a sex change. Whatever. Eventually, they all get undone, if not by the folks who made the particular issues then by their successors. It ain't good for the merchandising and the long-term health of the property to maul it for very long.

And of course, at some point, someone in the office says, "We've really lost the theme and concept of this comic." And then the jarring gimmick is to take it back to its roots.

I'm a little reticent to say how Jack would have felt about some things. I know his strong feelings on some topics. On others though, you have to remember that Jack was a vast thinker who didn't always view the world or some aspect of it as we (mere) mortals would. He sometimes surprised me with his "take" on some issue and when he did, it was usually because I was looking at a tree and he was looking at the entire forest.

That said, I feel safe to say that the first question Jack would probably ask would be "Is it a good story?" If it isn't, then it's a bad idea right there. If it is, then you go on to Question Two, which would be "Does it box the current and future writers in and damage their ability to create good stories?" If the answer is no, then fine. If it's yes…well, that's why these premise-altering storylines are usually reversed and the dead character is brought back to life or the marriage is forgotten or the whole thing turns out to be a dream or a clone or they just plain reboot the strip and start over.

I would guess that just of stories that continued Kirby characters after he'd departed and were issued during his lifetime, Jack probably never looked at 90% of them. Of the remainder, he rarely recognized anything but the characters' visuals — and sometimes not even that — though he was usually too polite to say so. I can think of a few times he objected to something if he found it personally offensive…and if this new series has Captain America spouting anti-Semitic slogans — yeah, probably. But then he would have objected if they had someone else's hero spouting anti-Semitism, too.

You're right. He didn't much mind what others did with his characters. If they could take what he left them and use it as the starting point to craft new, excellent issues, that was great. He just objected to anyone claiming that he and his successor were collaborating on a single body of work. To Jack, his issues were his issues and they were independent from that other guys' issues. It's kind of like "Build on the land I've left you but please don't strip-mine it." That's good advice in many aspects of life.

Back in this message, I told you about a Los Angeles landmark — Johnie's Coffee Shop. In this town, the waiters and waitresses just wait to get into the movies and so does this coffee shop. It stopped serving food some time ago and now it's just rented out as a filming location. I suspect it's been in more movies and TV shows than Michael Caine.

But here's a news flash: It now has a new function. It's getting into politics. Its owners — the same folks who own the 99-Cent Stores, have put it to work to try and get Bernie Sanders elected. This makes sense since I think Bernie bought his one suit at one of their stores.

A writer named David — let me make sure I spell his last name right — E-v-a-n-i-e-r has written a fine book on Woody Allen that I've mentioned here before. I would praise it even if its author wasn't my cousin and I wasn't quoted several times in its pages. It's also received extensive praise from people who aren't related to us.

David just authored this article about the allegation that Mr. Allen, many years ago, molested his adopted daughter. There's no new evidence in this case nor is there likely to ever be any. The reason it's being blogged about again across the 'net is that Allen's estranged son Ronan noted the publicity for Woody's new movie and some accolades tossed the director's way and complained in public that his sister's charges have not been "vindicated by conviction." But how could they ever be?

Rightly or wrongly, the official investigations resulted in no charges being filed and the Statute of Limitations has long since ended any chance of prosecution. Assuming Allen doesn't change his story and confess or Mia Farrow doesn't say, "Nothing happened. I just made my kids believe that because I was furious at Woody," nothing's going to change. All that can happen from here on is to just make more people believe it by saying it over and over. Which might not be wrong if the charge was true.

David's writings and other things I've read have convinced me it's not; that it has not been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This conclusion is not because I admire and respect Woody Allen, though I do. I admire and respect the comedic skills of Dr. William Henry "Bill" Cosby, Jr as well but I think he's a serial rapist. What baffles me are the folks who are absolutely, 100% certain Allen is one of the non-serial variety and I suspect most of them are making the illogical leap from finding Woody Allen creepy — an understandable impression — to finding him guilty.

Sorry but I have a lot on my plate these days…and I'm also way behind in answering the e-mails that I think I ought to answer, too. This condition may persist for a little while.

The Inspector General of the State Department has finally issued the long-awaited report on e-mail retention practices and what Hillary Clinton (and others) did right and wrong. Turns out, as we already knew, there was much wrong but there's no evidence of deliberate misdeeds or of any actual breaches of security. The whole thing is one of those matters that is an outrageous scandal if you are opposed to Hillary Clinton and a minor screw-up if you aren't. More and more, it's obvious that that's how we now roll in politics: A scandal is only a scandal when you can use it to attack the enemy. Even Republicans who were recently outraged over things Trump has said and done have remembered that party outranks principles and his transgressions can be overlooked as easily as Democrats can overlook things they wish people named Clinton hadn't said or done. It's been a while since I've seen any outrage that didn't conform to those rules.

Judging by new leaks of that old deposition, Bill Cosby seems to be in more trouble than we thought. Last December, we quoted legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin here as saying, "It's a good guess that Cosby will end 2016 in prison — and that he will end his life destitute." That seemed like an extraordinary prediction at the time but now it makes me wonder if someone showed Toobin that deposition back then.

Back to stuff that takes precedence over blogging…

I'll probably mark my ballot for Bernie Sanders. I find it hard to believe he can beat Hillary and just as hard (despite some polls) to believe he'd do better against Trump. But I do like the idea that America is ready for more liberal candidates and the better he does, the more that will be accepted. So that's how I guess I'll vote — but like Amanda Marcotte, I wish Bernie would get over this idea that sinister forces and corruption are the only reasons in the world anyone is not voting for Bernie Sanders.

In the meantime, Dana Milbank discusses two reasons that Donald Trump refuses to release his taxes. One is that they will show that he ain't as rich as he claims. The other is that it will show that via the many loopholes available to those in the realty biz, Trump has been paying little or nothing in taxes. Either of these would be pretty damaging to his campaign.

Absolutely no one buys the reason he gives, which is that he's currently under an I.R.S. audit. A guy in as many businesses as Trump is probably always under an audit for something and that never stops anyone else from releasing tax info. The only kinda-legit reason I can imagine for not releasing this tax data, as he has insisted others do, is the same reason I would imagine Hillary Clinton doesn't want to release the texts of certain speeches she's given to folks like those at Goldman-Sachs: It would be a bonanza for political opponents who like to yank chunks out of context and spin them as indecent and possibly illegal acts. There are folks out there who can do that with just about anything, no matter how legal or innocent it is.

Cartoonist Mell Lazarus died this morning. This was not unexpected as he had been in poor health the last few months. In fact, everything after this sentence was written about two weeks ago because I knew I'd need it any day now.

The photo above of Mell with his dear friend Sergio Aragonés was taken last January 23 when the National Cartoonists Society — of which he was a longtime member and past president — presented Mell with its highest award, the Medal of Honor. The ceremony was touching in many ways but Mell was frail and I wasn't the only one there who wondered if we were honoring a beloved figure and also saying goodbye.

Mell Lazarus was born May 3, 1927 and grew up in Brooklyn. He began cartooning in his teen years and worked a lot for Al Capp and for Al's brother Elliott Caplin. Elliott managed Toby Press, a family-owned comic book publisher and Mell worked there. The experience taught him much about the business and it inspired a wonderful novel he wrote, The Boss Is Crazy Too. It's long outta-print but well worth tracking down.

Mell wrote novels and magazine articles and some TV but his main endeavor was newspaper strips. Miss Peach started in 1957 and ran until 2002. Momma started in 1970 and continues to this day, though Mell's involvement in its production necessarily declined in recent years. For a time, he also wrote another strip under a pen name — Pauline McPeril, which was drawn by Jack Rickard.

The man was very prolific, very funny and universally loved by his fellow cartoonists. I got to sit next to him at the N.C.S. banquet in January and our conversation was interrupted — and I am not complaining in the least — by a steady flow of everyone else at the party, coming by to hug Mell and praise Mell and get their photo with Mell and to tell Mell that the honor couldn't go to a more deserving recipient. I'm so glad they gave it to him when they did.