I'm watching C-Span…watching speeches that precede a vote on the "Fiscal Cliff" bill in, allegedly, the next hour.

Is there any record of any of these speeches ever influencing a vote? Or of even being heard by most folks who will be voting?

Yes, yes…I understand that it's just posturing for the press and for constituents. But has it ever been anything more than that?

I also wonder whether they ever impress constituents or mollify those who might be angry about the vote. Half these reps seem to be reading speeches someone else has prepared…and a few look like they're reading them for the first time. The ones who aren't reading are rambling. Rep. David Dreier was just telling a story about one of his college professors and it seemed to have the scantest relevance to the bill at hand. Rep. Jared Pols is now congratulating all his colleagues who are there today to vote.

Maybe if they got rid of stuff like this, they'd have gotten to this important vote before the last minute.

Ezra Klein has everything you need to know about the New Year's Eve deal…and probably more than you want to know. Everybody got something. Nobody got everything. And we have to do it all over again soon.

This may interest some of you. In 1931, Stan Laurel and Oliver Hardy made a short comedy called Chickens Come Home — a remake of a silent film they'd made only four years earlier called Love 'em and Weep. Chickens Come Home was one of their longer shorts, running a little over 30 minutes.

In the early days of sound film, the studios hadn't yet mastered the art of dubbing movies for foreign release. It had been so easy to sell silent films overseas — you just remade the titles — but for talkies, it wasn't that simple. Rather than lose those lucrative foreign markets, some studios took to remaking their output in other languages. Laurel and Hardy would make a film and then they'd do one or more foreign versions, redoing the entire film (minus any scenes with no dialogue) using the same sets and costumes but with everyone, including the two stars, speaking Spanish or French or German.

Stan and Ollie spoke no other tongues so a coach would guide them through the translated scripts. Their dialogue would be written out phonetically on a blackboard just off-camera. In our clip today, they are not dubbed. They're actually speaking (in this case) Spanish…and you can sometimes catch them reading it off that blackboard. Some of the other actors (most notably in this one, Jimmy Finlayson who plays the butler) were in the American version and they too used the blackboard. Other actors you'll see were Spanish-speaking ones who were hired just for these versions, replacing actors in the English-language filming.

This, the Spanish version of Chickens Come Home, is called Politiquerias and it runs 56 minutes. Because of differences in what the Spanish distributors wanted, the film was padded out with new scenes, most of them featuring Spanish variety acts who have nothing to do with the Laurel-Hardy storyline. The most "interesting" (disgusting) of these acts is a gent named Hadji Ali whose specialty was that he would eat and drink a number of odd things and then vomit them up on the stage. That's right: Another damned vomiting act. Justin Bieber should be paying royalties. You might want to skip that part.

If you don't know Spanish, you may not be able to follow the plot which goes like this: Oliver is a successful manure merchant who is planning to run for mayor. An old girl friend shows up one day and blackmails him. She has a photo of him that would end his political ambitions and probably, if Mrs. Hardy saw it, his life. So the rest of the film is about Stan and Ollie trying to get the photo back and hide the blackmailer and a lot of it is even funny when you can't understand the dialogue…not that I expect many of you will make it all the way through this. But I even love watching those two men when I barely know what they're saying — so I did…

Well, so far it isn't bad. Obama seems to have a deal with Senate Republicans to fix that which is in immediate need of fixing, economy-wise. I'm a little puzzled why the press is reporting it like it's a minor matter to get House Republicans to pass it.

I was bemused by this paragraph in the New York Times report on the deal…

Under the agreement, tax rates would jump to 39.6 percent from 35 percent for individual incomes over $400,000 and couples over $450,000, while tax deductions and credits would start phasing out on incomes as low as $250,000, a clear victory for President Obama, who ran for re-election vowing to impose taxes on the wealthy.

I was under the impression that the wealthy already paid taxes…maybe not enough but I think the word the reporter was looking for there was "raise" or maybe "increase."

Oh, well. May '13 prove lucky and may you have fewer reasons 365 days from now than you do now to be glad it's a new year.

The latest Peter David News is that there isn't much Peter David news. His wonderful wife Kathleen updates matters over on her blog. It sounds like he has a lot of work and therapy ahead to bounce back from this. It also sounds like with Kathleen's help, he'll get 'er done.

A fascinating feature of the Internet is that news of something like this can spread instantly and an avalanche of well wishes can instantly result. The 'net is so filled with expressions of concern and love for Peter that another writer told me he was considering announcing he'd had a stroke just to see what he'd get. In his case, it would probably be a few messages from folks who'd loaned him money reminding him not to die in debt. But Peter is a different case and I hope he's seeing all those messages. They can only have a good impact on him.

You gonna be home tonight? I am. The worst parties I've ever been to in my life were on New Year's Eve, plus I had a couple of near-collisions with drivers who'd partied way more than one should when one is driving. One seemed too drunk to be walking. So I always stay here and usually try to finish some script that was due that year before that year ends. Tonight, we can also all watch the Fiscal Cliff negotiations and see Congress drop the ball.

But you can also bring the party to you. For several years now, my friends Stu Shostak and Jeanine Kasun have hosted a great party you can listen to on your computer or cellular device. It's New Year's Eve Live with Stu and Jeanine and it runs six hours starting at 7 PM Pacific Time which is, of course, 10 PM Eastern. If you dwell in some other time zone, you can probably figure your start time out from that. Listen in for a little music and lotsa talk with a bevy of spectacular guests — some live at Stu's house and some phoning it in. I'll be phoning it in shortly after Midnight on the west coast.

Who else? Here's a partial list: June Foray, Hank Garrett, Rose Marie, Stan Livingston, Peter Mark Richman, Geri Jewell, Fred Frees, Francine York, Randy West, Christopher Bay, Vince Waldron, Joe Alaskey, Joan Howard, Jill Howard, Bob Illes, Steve Beverly and Wesley Hyatt. (My apologies to those I couldn't fit in the above illustration.) Various folks will be chatting at various times…and there will also be phone-in trivia contests with actual prizes and a few surprises. You may especially enjoy hearing Stu get increasingly drunk and be unable to work his audio equipment.

How can you hear such a thing? Go to the Stu's Show website and you'll find many ways there to join the party. I listened to much of it last year and enjoyed it a whole lot and I find that it helps to put a lampshade on your head. Or better still, the entire lamp.

We always link to news stories about MAD and here's the latest. Notice how editor John Ficarra has stopped aging and is actually getting younger. So is Al Jaffee…

When you fly, you're ordered to turn off all electronic devices during take-off and landing. There seems to be a lot of debate going on as to whether there's any good reason for this. Those who say there is don't seem to be able to say what that reason might be…or at least, they don't want to take the responsibility for lifting that rule and then there's some big air crash that gets blamed on a passenger using his iPhone to play Angry Birds.

I have the feeling we're not only about to see the end of that rule but the introduction (if it hasn't been tried already) of airlines competing by advertising they offer the best Wi-Fi signal throughout your flight. And maybe free loaner Kindles (or some other such device) in First Class.

2012 wouldn't let us get away without another dose of bad news. Peter David, a fine writer and good friend, has suffered a stroke that has impaired his vision and paralyzed most of his right side. He was on vacation in Florida when it occurred and is awaiting further prognosis or diagnosis or some kind of nosis.

This is one of those moments — we all probably have way too many of them — when you wish there was something really helpful you could do…but there isn't anything. At least, not yet. You can think good thoughts about the person and if you believe it helps them or you, pray — but that's about it. And Peter would be the first guy to be frustrated to be in that position if it was a friend of his who'd had the stroke. I'll let you know if I hear anything else but it'll probably be posted to Peter's weblog…which at this moment seems to have crashed due to heavy traffic. The blog will probably be back shortly and Peter will probably be back not long after that.

For the last few years, my ability to travel — or even plan things locally — was diminished by my need to be available to an ailing mother and also a lot of killer deadlines. I've not made it to an awful lot of events I would have liked to attend and shows I would have liked to have seen, including two musicals by an actor-songwriter named Lin-Manuel Miranda. I didn't see his Tony award-winning musical In the Heights when it played Los Angeles, I missed his follow-up — Bring It On: The Musical — when it played L.A. and I've now missed it in New York since it closes tonight. I've missed many others but those two I wanted to see because I've become a distant fan of this man.

I became aware of him when he was responsible for the greatest wedding party video ever and if that's all he'd ever made, fine. I'd still think highly of him. But he's gone on to write and/or perform a lot of things that…well, I guess I should just say I've liked what I've seen and hope I'll see more.

Several folks told me Bring It On: The Musical was terrific and I hope/trust it'll come this way again. I have a special interest in it because a few years ago, a very real producer of very real shows asked me to write the book for a musical about the world of competitive cheerleading. Oddly enough, in another of the endless string of coincidences that I call my life, the call came to me when I was a guest at a Mid-Ohio Con in Columbus, Ohio — and Mid-Ohio Con was sharing the convention center back there with a cheerleading competition. As I sat in the lobby there getting the offer on my cellphone, I was literally surrounded by teenagers rehearsing what the show would be about.

So I snuck into their hall to do a little research and spent some time thinking about stories and themes and such. I also wound up lunching at a food court there with three 14-year-old girls in cheerleader outfits, asking them questions about their world and getting some odd looks from Mid-Ohio Con attendees passing by.

Soon after, the producer heard about Bring It On: The Musical and called to say, "We're too late." Which we were…so that was that.

(By the way: You'd be amazed how often this has happened to me…and I'm not talking about offers from folks who are kidding themselves to believe they can get a show produced on Broadway. I'm talking about producers who've either actually done it or done similar, successful things. I've had about a dozen of these proposed…and then after a few meetings or sometimes even before any, they fall apart for reasons that have nothing to do with me, often problems with the rights to underlying material. Fortunately, I have long since learned not to count on things until they're a lot farther along than any of these ever were so I've avoided disappointment. In fact, these days when I get offered something of the sort, my attitude is kind of like, "Great! I can't wait to see why this one won't happen!")

Anyway, that's one reason I'm curious to see Bring It On: The Musical. Two more are the general excellence of Mr. Miranda's work and clips like this one. This is from this year's Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade, which means it's the cast shivering in the cold and lip-syncing just for the TV cameras, not the parade-goers, but I still like it. See if you do, too…

Would you believe there are still people in little rooms counting the votes in the last presidential election? Obama's lead has grown slightly since November 6. Here's the current tally and it shows Obama beating Romney 51.06% to 47.21%.

I still love the fact that when Dick Morris and others were predicting a Romney win, two or three points was going to be a "landslide." But when Obama wins by three or four, that's not a landslide. That's not even a mandate to change anything. That's just "Mitt Romney wasn't a very good candidate."

Oprah Winfrey has this show on her network called Oprah's Next Chapter. The premise, I guess, is to do a more in-depth, audience-free interview with some biggie and they're rerunning all or most of them on Sunday, January 6, culminating in the debut of a new one with David Letterman. If you get that channel, I'd recommend the conversation with Stephen Colbert and I'll be setting my TiVo to snag the Letterman one, assuming I'm able to turn anything on here with my Harmony Remote One by then.

Oprah's folks released — and some sites are treating it as Breaking News more important than the predicted (by some) impending collapse of our economy — that Dave Letterman said the following of Jay Leno…

I've never met anyone quite like Jay. And I will say, and I'm happy to say, I think he's the funniest guy I've ever known. Just flat out. If you go and see him do his nightclub act — just the funniest, the smartest, wonderful observationist and very appealing as a comic. Therefore, the fact that he is maybe the most insecure person I have ever known — I could never reconcile that.

I stared at that quote for a few minutes to make sure it wasn't Leno talking about Letterman. Reverse the names and take out that part about a nightclub act and it would be at least as applicable. I suspect a lot of folks who've had brushes with either man or both lately would consider it an act of projection.

It is also worth remembering that apart from an hour or so together spent doing that Super Bowl commercial with Oprah, Dave and Jay have not spoken in something like twenty years. And those are twenty years during which both have been through a lot of successes and failures of varying magnitude and have had ample reasons to envy and/or resent each other.

I do not pretend to know either man like a personal friend…but via brief encounters and watching them for afar: Well, I have to say Leno has struck me as one of the most secure people in show business. Financially, he's set for many lives. Personally, he seems to have a famously happy marriage. In terms of employment, there's a real question as to how much longer he'll be hosting The Tonight Show but (a) that's been true at times for two decades now and he's usually triumphed and (b) it's not like when it does end, he'll be ashamed of his short run and then have nothing lucrative to do that he loves doing.

Moreover, Jay strikes me as a pretty secure guy in an area that I think explains a lot of his success on the Tonight Show. He is unthreatened by other comedians. He loves to see other performers do well. He is comfy doing a sketch where he plays straight man to someone like Fred Willard or Gilbert Gottfried, and is willing to hand large chunks of his show over to "correspondents" (other comedians) to, hopefully, soar. A friend of mine who was involved with both shows once remarked to me that when it came time to send someone else out on stage or on a remote to be funny, Jay would want the funniest guy they could get and Dave would want to use one of the stagehands.

There's a story about Jerry Lewis that may be apocryphal but the lesson is not. Supposedly, a writer (supposedly Neil Simon in his TV-writing days) writes a ten-minute sketch for a Jerry Lewis TV special. The writer hands in the sketch early in the week and Jerry says he loves it and doesn't need any rewrites. But as the week of rehearsals goes on, Jerry begins dropping out many of the best lines and trimming it down…and in some versions I've heard of the tale, the sketch gets turned into three minutes of Jerry making funny faces. In others, it's eliminated in its entirety.

The writer goes to Jerry after the show and asks what was wrong with it: "Didn't you think the writing was funny?" Jerry replied, "Hysterical. That was the problem. I don't want to go out there and have the writing be funny. I want me to be funny."

I heard that story several times from comedy writers of Simon's generation, usually in tandem with tales of Milton Berle cutting everyone else's best lines out of a script. They'd say, "Berle isn't satisfied to be in a routine that the audience is laughing at. He has to be the only person in it they're laughing at." Berle was famously threatened by other comedians. So was and is Lewis. And I think one of the reasons Letterman's show has suffered over the years is that it's become all about Dave and no one else.

This is a complaint I've heard from some of his writers. They all write reams of material that goes unused. Some nights, Dave would rather repeat recent monologue jokes than use new ones. Scripted bits are discarded in favor of Dave just sitting there, rambling about whatever he's pissed off about that week. He's sometimes very funny doing that but the buzz from inside is that's not why he's doing it. He keeps a good, well-paid writing staff because he knows a successful series requires a good, well-paid writing staff. But when it's time to decide what to do on the show tonight, he doesn't want someone else — even if that someone else is an unseen, unheard writer — to be the funny one out there.

(And while I'm judging talk show hosts from afar, I might as well mention that I think this is one of the problems Conan O'Brien has had the last few years. He has on some very funny people and then when they're in his guest chair and scoring, he tends to try and top them or at least turn their hilarious anecdote into a two-person routine. Leno has many shortcomings as a talk show interviewer but one he doesn't have is stepping on a guest's punchlines or trying to pull focus away from them. Jay seems to appease any need he has to be the funny one out there with his monologue and then the rest of the program can showcase others. And Craig Ferguson is better at this than any of them. He knows how to be funny without taking anything away from a guest.)

So I guess I'm just fascinated that David Letterman thinks Jay Leno is so insecure. There may be some sense in which that is true and I'm eager to watch the whole interview and hear the context of that remark and any supporting evidence. I'm not saying he's wrong so much as I'm curious as to in what sense he might be right. Maybe it is just a twenty-year-old observation that isn't as applicable these days or maybe Dave sees something that isn't evident to us.

Word from inside the Leno Camp is that Jay isn't going down (i.e., off) without a fight. All the audiences for the late night shows are at levels that would have gotten them cancelled ten years ago and the demographics — appealing to younger audiences — are therefore becoming more critical. Leno at worst can just go on the road and make tons o' cash doing something he loves — stand-up — for the rest of his life. One of his writers said to me not long ago, "Jay used to say his mission in life was 'tell joke, get check, tell joke, get check…' Now it's more like 'tell joke, get Maserati, tell joke, get Porsche…'" So even if Jay does get thrown over again for a younger guy, he'll do fine. Dave on the other hand doesn't seem to have anywhere to go, at least professionally, once his show ends. Maybe that has something to do — either way — with this whole subject of insecurity.