I just watched Michael Moore's Slacker Uprising, the free movie I told you about here. Got it as a free download from Amazon to my office TiVo.

I go hot and cold on Michael Moore. I think some of what he's done is brilliantly clever and I admire his sheer chutzpah. When Fahrenheit 9/11 was an issue, a lot of folks bombarded me with "fact checks" that they thought proved Moore was a sleazy conman and liar…but the proof of that seemed thin to me and it's gotten thinner ever since. Ultimately, I don't think he was any less accurate than most of the mainstream media — and about Iraq, probably more accurate than most. On the other hand, some of his excesses strike me as manipulative and tasteless…and not always in the way that "tasteless" can be a good thing.

His Slacker Uprising is a 100-minute infomercial for Michael Moore. We follow him on his 2004 campaign tour, trying to get the vote out for Kerry. There are a lot of audiences showing their love for Moore. There are clips of really, really stupid people opposing him or trying to silence him. (Well, of course. Moore edited this film.) I'm afraid I don't see the point of the movie except to tell us that (a) Mr. Moore sure did a lot to try and get Kerry elected, (b) that Moore can (or could) fill huge stadiums with adoring fans…and (c) that Kerry would have done worse if not for Michael Moore. About the only insight you'll get is why it's free. If I'd paid for a DVD or gone to a theater and bought a ticket for this, I'd have been pissed.

In an article today, Carl Bernstein quotes John McCain as follows…

I've always tried to act on what I thought was the best for the country. And that has guided me. The only thing I can do is assure people that I would act on principle.

I don't believe that…and not just about McCain. I don't believe that in my lifetime, I've seen any politician who has struck me as standing on principle and "the good of the country" over personal benefit. Perhaps if I think back, I can say it about some third party candidate who never stood a chance of winning…or some Democratic or Republican who finished near last place.

But they all — 100% of the major contenders — decide that what's best for the country is that they be elected and hold power. That may sound cynical…and to the extent it does, it's probably an indictment of the voters as much as it's a criticism of those whose names appear on ballots. Does anyone want to argue that Mssrs. Obama and McCain have both taken some less-than-sincere positions because what they really believe would cost them votes? Even their supporters rationalize the distortions and reversed stances as "What he has to say to get elected."

Richard Nixon famously said on several occasions, "I will decide [whatever the issue is] on the basis of what's best for America, not what's best for Richard Nixon." And every time, he decided that what was best for Richard Nixon just "happened" to coincide with what was best for America. That seems to be how it always works.

Everyone in the world is sending me a link to this article about Abe Vigoda. Abe, by the way, is still alive.

You might appreciate this. Jim Newman, who was one of the folks behind that live What's My Line? show I wish they'd restart, tells me about a site that features great podcast interviews with folks in and around the TV business. It's TV Time Machine and I'm enjoying their Mel Brooks chat while I'm typing this. There are others there I plan to enjoy soon, including one with Guillermo Del Toro discussing the Rod Serling TV series, Night Gallery. Go there and you'll probably find a few that interest you.

This coming Sunday, September 28, I'll be one of many authors at The West Hollywood Book Fair. I'm appearing on a podcast taping at 5:00, and I'll probably be around before that. The podcast is for comicsoncomics.com, a web show where comedians sit around and discuss funnybooks. Unless they photograph my bad side, I'll let you know when it's online for viewing.

Then on Monday, I'm speaking about my latest book (this one) at the Santa Monica offices of the Google Empire. This event is not open to the public but it's being recorded for the 'net and unless they shoot my bad side…

The weekend of October 4-5, I'll be a guest at the Mid-Ohio Con in Columbus, Ohio. This is always a great convention and they have a great guest list this year. Details on programming will be coming soon.

Then! The evening of October 14, I'm part of a panel discussion at the University of Southern California called "Comedy and Politics," which is all about the impact of topical humor on the world and especially on the current election. It takes place at 7:30 and is free and open to the public. Details can be found here.

I also have to go over to my mother's house one of these days and I have some marketing to do, plus my shirts are ready at the cleaners.

Michael Moore has put his new movie, Slacker Uprising, online for free downloads, viewing and just about anything else you want to do with it. I haven't watched it yet, and may not get around to it for some time. But if you're interested, here's the link.

From the 2008 Republican Party Platform…

We do not support government bailouts of private institutions. Government interference in the markets exacerbates problems in the marketplace and causes the free market to take longer to correct itself.

I believe this was also John McCain's position a week ago at this time.

Shelly Goldstein was the first of several folks to forward this to me…

Dear American:

I need to ask you to support an urgent secret business relationship with a transfer of funds of great magnitude.

I am Ministry of the Treasury of the Republic of America. My country has had crisis that has caused the need for large transfer of funds of 800 billion dollars US. If you would assist me in this transfer, it would be most profitable to you.

I am working with Mr. Phil Gram, lobbyist for UBS, who will be my replacement as Ministry of the Treasury in January. As a Senator, you may know him as the leader of the American banking deregulation movement in the 1990s. This transactin is 100% safe.

This is a matter of great urgency. We need a blank check. We need the funds as quickly as possible. We cannot directly transfer these funds in the names of our close friends because we are constantly under surveillance. My family lawyer advised me that I should look for a reliable and trustworthy person who will act as a next of kin so the funds can be transferred.

Please reply with all of your bank account, IRA and college fund account numbers and those of your children and grandchildren to wallstreetbailout@treasury.gov so that we may transfer your commission for this transaction. After I receive that information, I will respond with detailed information about safeguards that will be used to protect the funds.

Yours Faithfully,
Minister of Treasury Paulson

I dunno who wrote it but it's pretty darned clever.

Okay, so the political news is pretty dreary. I'll cheer you up with a couple of goodies. Over at the website of Turner Classic Movies, you can watch one of the best Laurel and Hardy features (some think it's the best), Way Out West, which they made in 1937. The whole thing's online and it's absolutely free. What's better than Laurel and Hardy? Free Laurel and Hardy. Click right here and enjoy my favorite comedians at the peak of their Laurel and Hardiness.

And if you want to make a 1937 double feature of it, you can view another pretty fine film from that year — Topper starring Roland Young, Constance Bennett and Cary Grant — by clicking over here. Sorry I can't supply free popcorn but Bill Gates hasn't figured out yet how to let the Internet do that. Give him time, give him time.

Way back on June 7, 2005, you read the following statement on this weblog…

George W. Bush's approval rating is now a full twenty points lower than Bill Clinton's was on the day he was impeached.

How did I figure that? Bush's approval rating was then at 48%. Clinton's, on the day he was impeached, varied between 68% and 73%. For the sake of fairness, I took the low.

Then on March 24, 2006, I pointed out that the gap was now thirty points. Bush was at 38%.

On April 27, 2007, I noted that the gap was at forty points. Bush was at 28%.

On June 5, I predicted that Bush was would hit 45 points below Clinton's impeachment numbers and might even make 50.

Well, I wasn't paying attention and I missed it when he reached 45. In fact, we're probably about to see 50. According to one poll, Bush's approval rating is now at 19%, which is 49 points lower than Bill Clinton's on the day he was impeached. And this is before the full impact of the current financial debacle settles in over this country.

The thing that I find amazing is that Bush's actual popularity rating is probably lower even than that. My friend Roger voted for the guy, hates the guy, thinks Bush has undermined every Conservative principle that made him an appealing candidate in the first place. But if a pollster asked Roger what he thought, he'd say Bush has been the best of all possible Chief Execs. Roger fears that the unpopularity of Bush is translating into negative feelings about those Conservative principles; that to repudiate Bush is to harm the cause of lower taxes, eliminating abortion and gay marriage, being tough with terrorists, etc.

If the pollsters could administer Sodium Pentathol, Bush would probably be in single digit popularity…you know, about where Cheney is without the Sodium Pentathol.

Before we hand hundreds of billions of dollars to the Bush administration to buy and socialize our way out of the current financial crisis, it might not be a bad idea to pause. Pause and consider how efficiently they've handled large sums of cash in the past.

Think Progress has a partial list of cases where money has either simply disappeared or has been spent to get almost nothing in return. Some of it looks like deliberate efforts to transmit zillions in government funds (i.e., our money) to favored private corporations. Some of it looks like sheer, bone-stupid incompetence. None of it inspires confidence that they won't take all the money they now say they need to disperse and spend it all on gin.