We've been following the case of Juan Manuel Alvarez, who in 2005 parked his SUV on some commuter train tracks in Los Feliz and caused a wreck that killed eleven people and injured more than 180 others. I had a little trouble fathoming why the trial of this guy had to take more than about twenty minutes.

Alvarez begged for forgiveness and claimed that it hadn't occurred to him that anyone on the train would be injured. Yeah, I can see where you might not think that parking your SUV on train tracks and dousing it in gasoline could possibly do any harm.

Today, a judge sentenced the guy to eleven consecutive life sentences without possibility of parole. His Honor further said he wished he'd been able to just sentence him to prison "forever," as if that would be longer than the sentence that was imposed. Frankly, I'll be very surprised if Alvarez serves out more than eight life sentences even though stupid dies hard.

I didn't post much yesterday because I was in a recording studio, directing voice tracks for The Garfield Show, a new animated series starring everyone's favorite lasagna-guzzling feline. It debuts in Europe later this year (I think) and on the Cartoon Network in '09 (I'm told).

The folks in the above photo are as follows: The guy on the left is Frank Welker, the new voice of Garfield and, I believe, the "workingest" voice actor in the history of the business. To the right of Frank is Gregg Berger, the voice of Odie the Dog and hundreds of other characters on this show and others. Just to the right of Gregg is Andy Morris, the best danged audio engineer in the business. The man in the checked shirt is comedy legend Stan Freberg, who was playing a guest star role as a really snotty villain. The other guy with facial hair is the brilliant Wally Wingert, the new voice of Garfield's "owner," Jon. The lady is Audrey Wasilewski who, when she's not doing on-camera work, speaks for Garfield's lady love, Arlene. And the fellow in the green shirt is me.

It was a long day's work but I had the easy job. The other folks had to squeak and grunt and scream and make dog sounds and interpret all manner of silly dialogue. I just had to sit there, enjoy their performances and occasionally push a button and say, "Let's try that line again." Someone wrote to ask me recently what the secret is to directing the voices for a cartoon show. It's very simple, really. You hire the right actors, hand them their scripts, then get the hell out of the way.

I guess a Slow News Week is when the media pays the kind of attention they're paying to who the candidates may pick as their running mates. I keep reading stories that treat it as Breaking News that Obama's announcement "may" come soon and that McCain's will probably follow. No, that's not news. Neither are the various "short lists" — you know, it'll definitely, absolutely, positively be one of these three people…unless, of course, it's someone else.

A lot of these conjectures say it won't be Joe Biden since he's from a state that has very few electoral votes and which Obama is certain to carry anyway. Hey, didn't that Cheney guy come from a state that has very few electoral votes and which Bush was certain to carry anyway? It annoys me a little that this kind of logic is getting tossed around by reporters and pundits who are pretending they can give us insight into a situation where they're pretty clueless. They all make it sound like they've obtained access to Obama's short list when it's actually their own supposition they're giving us. It also annoys me, of course, that I haven't been vetted for the Veep job. What the hell are they waiting for?

And I guess it's a little annoying that all this speculation out of nowhere is about how picking this guy or that gal may help or hurt Obama's chance of winning. The choice of either running mate — Obama's or McCain's — matters partly because of that but also perhaps a tiny bit because (let's do this in boldface:) that person stands a good chance of becoming the "leader of the free world." They won't be the next one but they might be the one after owing to death, impeachment, resignation or because the position makes them a front-runner to succeed as a candidate.

I have no particular faves to fill out the bottom of either ticket. Ideally, I guess, I'd like to see Obama pick someone who'll help him win, if not because of the state they're from then because they'll be a great candidate who'll go out and play not Attack Dog but something nicer and equally effective. It might be nice if that person was also qualified to actually be President of the United States, too. And I'd like to see John McCain pick someone who all of America will agree would be an absolute disaster as a Vice-President. I'm thinking Dick Cheney.

Anyway, we'll know soon enough. Obama will apparently announce any day now via a text message that will go exclusively to those who've donated to his campaign. The rest of us will have to wait another twenty seconds before it's on every single news site. Don't you just hate it when you're the last to know?

I stopped watching Deal or No Deal some time ago but before I did, I predicted here (in this message, for instance) that if and when someone did win the million dollars, it would not be a surprise. The producers and network would make sure we knew about it in advance.

Well, you're about to be deluged with promos telling you that it's happened. The new season starts August 25 and on the second show they taped, someone won the million. This was apparently thanks to some rule changes necessitated by the fact that The Price Is Right Million Dollar Spectacular was giving away that amount rather often. They may not be airing that episode as the second one of the season…but it will happen on one of the first episodes broadcast this season.

The CNN site currently has a story up with the banner, "Obama May End VP Guessing Game Soon." It basically tells us that there's a good chance Barack Obama will soon disclose the name of his running mate. Apparently, there's this convention thing starting soon and he has to announce it by the end of that.

I'm so relieved. I was afraid he'd keep it a secret until some time next year.

So much happened at the Comic-Con International in San Diego that folks are still reporting on it. Here's Jim MacQuarrie with a report on the annual Jack Kirby Tribute Panel hosted by Guess Who. And here he is reporting on a panel I hosted called That 70's Panel.

By the way: In the latter, it says that Jim Starlin told a story about a certain art job that George Tuska did once. That was actually me who told that story. (No criticism of MacQuarrie, by the way. Transcripts of convention panels are frequently, like 90% of the time, filled with misquotes and misattributions. He's better than almost anyone else.)

While we're on the subject of the con, I have this from Dave Gordon…

I wonder whether your view of the convention is coloured by the fact that you spend so much of your time on panels, in a nice comfy seat, and not walking around in the heaving crowds. It has gotten a lot bigger in the last few years, and while the convention centre has expanded to try and accomodate it, the crowds have grown even more.

I guess this wouldn't really be a complaint, more a comment on the reality of it. One shouldn't criticise the Con for being popular, but I can understand how you don't have the same experience as the average attendee, and especially don't see the huge event it now is, as worse than it used to be.

Yes, it's true that as a Guest of Honor and the moderator of eight zillion panels, I don't have quite the same experience as the average attendee but, first of all, there are certainly times when I'm wandering around that hall, coping with the same crowds as anyone else…and they don't bother me.

Now, to that someone might say, "Yeah, but they might if you were walking around in those crowds for four solid days." And if someone said that, I'd answer, "Then don't spend four solid days doing that."

Remember the stellar advice of Henny Youngman — "Doctor, it hurts when I do this." "Then don't do that!" Go to panels and sit down. Find a booth where you know someone and they'll let you sit for a while so the convention can come to you. Or only go to the con for a day. I will also add that the average attendee doesn't have to deal with the schedule problems I have, running from meetings down on the floor, up to do panels for which I dare not be late. I'm not asking for sympathy…just noting that sometimes I have to navigate through that maze of people in Klingon suits in one helluva hurry and I always make it.

Ultimately though, I think the answer is not to be "the average attendee," whatever that is. I keep telling people that the convention they want to attend is probably in there somewhere…they just have to go out and find it. I don't know how many people told me they longed for the days when the con was all about creating comics and not about promoting new products…and then when I ask them if they made it down to the Artists' Alley section, they say no and/or ask what the heck that is. (What the heck it is is a large part of the exhibit hall where artists, young and old, sit around and show their wares and talk comics.)

Matter of fact, yesterday I dropped by a mini-con downtown and a friend of mine was bitching about the San Diego soiree, complaining about being surrounded by videogame promotions when what he was really interested in was the grand and glorious heritage of the classic comic book. What I asked him was what the hell he was doing down there in the videogaming moshpit when I was upstairs interviewing Al Feldstein and Al Jaffee and Jerry Robinson and Len Wein and…well, you get my point.

Come on, people. Do a little planning. Next year, study the program guide in advance. Examine the floor plan and figure out the whereabouts of the portions of the con that interest you. If it's all too overwhelming for four days, go for one or two. Or if that's still excessive, maybe you just plain need to go to smaller conventions. In a way, I think of the Comic-Con International as a whole bunch of smaller conventions — a comic con, an s-f con, an animation con, a gaming con, etc. — all being held simultaneously in one big building. It's like almost everything else that's good in life. It's there but you have to go look for it. It won't come to you.

Every few days from now 'til the election, I'm going to be reminding you — as a way of reminding myself — that polls are nowhere near as reliable as we often wish they were. The time to remember that is not when your guy is a little behind. It's when he's a little ahead that you have to remember that.

This does not mean the polls are meaningless. I think it's safe to say that Obama's going to win California and McCain's going to take Utah…but states where the candidates are within ten points of each other are probably best viewed as toss-ups. You can especially use up a lot of stomach lining between now and November 6 if you watch the states where they're three points apart switch back and forth, back and forth.

There are countless examples that could be cited of pollsters getting a vote wrong. The one I like to dredge up is pollster John Zogby calling the New York Senate race of 2000. The day before, he said it was dead even and announced, "I think we're looking at a one point race." The next day, Hillary Clinton beat her opponent 56%-44%.

That's not even close…and in a poll taken 48 hours before the election. How accurate do we think polls are this far in advance? Pollsters never seem to brag a lot about how well they called an election 2-3 months before it occurs. If they have anything to boast about, it's how close they got with their final pollings, the ones taken a day or two before.

All that said, I notice that Rasmussen, which usually skews a bit Republican, now has Al Franken and Norm Coleman tied in the Minnesota senate race. A month ago, Rasmussen gave Coleman a nine point lead and some other polls still have that kind of spread. Did Franken come up? Did Coleman go down? Was the poll just plain inaccurate a month ago? Is it inaccurate now? Who knows? At the moment, the presidential race feels like Obama has a small but sufficient lead…but between now and Election Day, we still have the naming of the running mates, the political conventions, the debates, a lot of advertising and endorsements, and big question marks of what will happen in many foreign locales…plus, you can count on Obama and McCain each saying a couple of really, really stupid things that will be blown all out of proportion and put each on the defensive for a time.

Oh, yeah. And after the votes are in and counted, we're going to hear that the winner "stole" the election and that it was all rigged. So we may not even know then.

Here is the greatest public service I've ever seen available on the Internet.

The makers of Imodium, a medicine that's supposed to cure Diarrhea, have a "map search" function over on their website. It doesn't show you where you can purchase Imodium. It shows you where to find a public restroom near you.

I especially like the little legal disclaimer on the page…

The content included in the Bathroom Finder is for informational purposes only. You agree you will not distribute, publish, transmit, modify, display or create derivative works from or exploit the contents of the Bathroom Finder in any way. The information on Bathroom Finder is provided through third parties and may contain inaccuracies and typographical errors. McNeil-PPC, Inc. makes no representation or warranties regarding the accuracy, quality, credibility, or suitability of the information or bathroom, which is provided "as is." McNeil-PPC, Inc. will not be liable for any loss or damage caused by reliance on the information obtained through the Bathroom Finder.

Wouldn't you have loved to hear the meeting where they decided they needed that? "You know, I'm all for telling people with Diarrhea where the bathrooms are…but what if they go to the locations we give them and there's no bathroom there or it's unsuitable? They might sue us!"

While you're on their site, by the way, you might want to print out a coupon. The way this election is going, you may need it.

That's another photo of Max, an extremely large pussycat I've mentioned here before. Max and his mate have taken up near-permanent residence in my backyard. He takes pretty good care of her. Last week, I had to take pretty good care of Max.

I came home, weary from a long day of running-around. I wanted to fall into bed but knew that I needed to finish a script. I wound up doing neither right away. On the way in, I pet Max and found blood on my hand. Max had a deep gash running along his side. It was not only bleeding, it was dirty and infested with ants and other insects.

He didn't seem to be in pain but that's not something that can be ignored. I picked him up (not easy to do) and stuffed him into the infamous trap that I once used to capture another feral friend…in that case, for neutering purposes. Then I drove Max over to Sepulveda Boulevard, where there are a couple of 24-hour veterinary clinics who specialize in charging you an awful lot of money when your pet is ill or injured after normal working hours. I have been there before with strays and it would be cheaper to take an animal to the Mayo Clinic, except that it's too far.

The folks at the place of Sepulveda were quite nice and since it wasn't really "my cat," they didn't charge me the full fee, which would have been roughly the amount of money that Ed McMahon owes. The lady at the desk seemed suspicious that the discount was warranted, saying things like, "Gee, strays are usually so scrawny and he's obviously very well fed." But the vet insisted I get the feral discount. Most bleeding had stopped so they cleaned Max's wound, put in a few stitches and gave him some sort of antibiotic. The vet's assistant theorized that Max had tried to squeeze through a fence and gotten impaled on something.

On their advice, I kept Max in the cage/trap in my garage for the next day or so. He was not happy in there — it made for cramped quarters, him being the size of a Honda Civic — but I think he understood. He's out now, back on all four feet, and he seems to be healing nicely. The experience did not affect his appetite, which is insatiable but does not allow him to eat any food that's been in the dish for over five minutes, even the dry stuff.

And that's the latest on the homeless shelter in my backyard…where last week, I set a new record: I was feeding five stray cats simultaneously. Years ago, I was a partner in a restaurant in Hollywood and I don't think we ever had that much consumption occurring at one time on the premises. Maybe we should have served Friskies Salmon Dinner.

Dick Cavett writes about why someone would want to be a standup comedian. Based on my own experiences with that breed, I agree and disagree with this piece. I think there are as many different reasons why someone takes up that line of work as there are jokes about people who work at McDonald's…or something. Most of the comedians I've known well have not been motivated by a desperate need to be loved. They've been guys (and gals) who looked at successful standups and said, "Hey, that looks like a great job and I think I could be good at it."

Okay, some thoughts on this article, which is about allegations of sexual harassment at the Comic-Con International. Can we start by all agreeing on a basic truth? Touching another person where they don't wish to be touched is wrong in about nineteen different ways. It can even be wrong when there are no sexual overtones involved. How wrong it is depends on what's being touched, who's doing the touching, how unwelcome the touching is, etc.

John DiBello, who wrote the article we're discussing, is a bright guy and his heart is absolutely in the right place. But I think he's missing the larger issue when he writes, "I would like to see something [in the convention policy statements] like 'Comic-Con has zero tolerance for harassment or violence against any of our attendees or exhibitors.'" That's not necessary any more than it is for the con to post signs that say, "No murdering allowed."

Harassment and violence are wrong everywhere. They're just as unacceptable in a Ralphs Market or at an Arby's or in your home as they are at the Comic-Con. Society needs to have zero tolerance for those things anywhere…not just where some proprietor announces it like it's a unique rule they've set up.

John notes that the convention does explicitly forbid smoking, drawn weapons, personal pages and selling bootleg videos on the floor and wonders why they don't mention sexual assault. Answer: There are people there who think that if they're not told otherwise, they can smoke, they can wield swords, etc. You have to specify because there are places and situations where it's okay to smoke or where you can request that someone be paged. There is no place where it's permissible in any way to go up to a stranger and start kissing or fondling them against their wishes. Stated policy or no stated policy, that is not acceptable. People should know this…and if they don't, the con announcing it in the program book is not going to make a lick of difference to them.

Now, John says he went to inquire about what the con would do about the transgressions he believes occurred and he could not get a satisfactory answer. He may have a good point here. As well-run as Comic-Con is (and every year, I'm amazed how well-run about 95% of it is), there are lapses. Almost everyone there is a "temp," after all. Ask a worker where the nearest men's room is and there's a 50-50 chance they'll send you the wrong way.

I'd like to think that's all that happened here: Someone didn't know what to do. I'm friendly with at least a dozen folks who work on the con, not for just one week a year but as full-time Comic-Con International employees…and if John had approached any one of them, they'd have snapped into action and made sure whatever had to be done was done. They are enormously good and conscientious people, which is one reason the con goes as smoothly as it does every year.

Perhaps they need to do more to make sure that those who work the convention for the 4.5 days are not clueless in this area; that they know what to do if someone reports that a stranger grabbed some body part or even somebody's wallet. The con doesn't need to tell us it's wrong but they may need to do a bit more so that anyone who feels victimized knows what to do about it, where to report it. They also need to make sure that those who do the alleged victimizing know that it will not go unaddressed. Even if the person being harassed is dressed like Vampirella.

That's all I want to say about this right now. Knowing me, I'll probably think of more later.