My pal Michael Reaves suggests we might all want to sign up for The 3rd Annual Nigerian EMail Conference.

Gray Davis may survive as governor not because anyone likes the job he's doing but because enough Californians come to see the entire recall as a colossal waste of time and money. Today, Larry Flynt entered the race, as did Angelyne, a local glamour girl who is famous only for being famous. By the time voting day rolls around, they could be among the more qualified names on a ballot the size of the Yellow Pages. Also today, some state officials said that the cost of the recall, which already seemed high to some at $35 million, could reach $60 million or more. The stupider and more expensive this thing gets, the more folks are going to vote to retain Davis just to not see this procedure succeed.

This article in The Sacramento Bee suggests that it may have cost the anti-Davis forces between two and three million dollars to force the special election. That's not a lot of money especially when you start thinking of guys like Larry Flynt who — and this is not an exaggeration — have sometimes dropped that much on a trip to Vegas. Does anyone think that if he's of a mind to, Flynt couldn't (or wouldn't) throw a few million around to force a recall of any governor he chooses? The Recall Proponents spent a little less than two bucks a signature to get this thing moving. Suppose Flynt got a lot of cute Hustler models, put them in sexy outfits and sent them out to get petitions signed, promising three dollars a signature. Do we think they couldn't collect 900,000? If Davis is kicked out and Riordan gets in, Flynt could easily buy enough signatures to recall Riordan. And it'll be another 60 million for that one, if not more.

Davis announced today that if he beats back the recall, he won't seek reimbursement from the state for his expenses. He may be legally entitled to them but among the issues he's going to campaign on, obviously, is that the recall is wasting money that could have gone for education, building roads, etc. By saying what he said today, he avoids having his opponents say that it will cost millions to keep him. Why couldn't the man have been that shrewd with our money?

Like all of you, I don't think much of Gray Davis…though Bill Maher made some good points in this article last week. Davis is not wholly to blame for California's economic woes. He may be to blame for covering up some of the bad news at election time, and for not being smarter in preventing energy conglomerates from bilking the state. But there's plenty of bad economic news out there that can't be blamed on him, and probably can't be solved by anyone else in that job in the next few years. If he can sell enough Californians on that concept, he's safe, because a lot of people are going to vote to retain him just because they don't like the process.

And, oh yeah: He needs to have one other condition to win. He needs there to not be a vastly more-appealing Democratic candidate on the ballot. If there is one, Davis is probably toast.

What's in the 28 redacted pages in the Congressional report on 9/11? Well, according to this article, a lot of ties between Saudi Arabia and the terrorists. The article goes on to say…

The Bush administration has, of course, good reason for not wanting to ruffle the Saudis by declassifying the 28 pages. Saudi Arabia sits atop 25 percent of the world's proven oil reserves and, through its dominant position in OPEC, essentially controls the global energy market. In addition to stabilizing world oil prices–most recently during the run-up to the war with Iraq–the Saudis also directly subsidize American consumers by offering oil at lower prices to the United States.

I dunno if this is true. But if it is, this may be what the next presidential election is all about: Bush phonied up the evidence and took us into a war against a nation that couldn't attack us while covering for one that helped support the hijackers but also supported the oil industry. He'd better come up with a way to knock that one down fast.

Here are some statistics from the Institute of Southern Studies…

• Percentage of the 108th U.S. Senate that engaged in combat while serving in the armed forces: 9
• Percentage of homeless men in the U.S. that have engaged in combat: 40
• Percent of lower ranking army personnel that experience "substantial financial difficulties": 40
• Percent of first-year members of Congress that are millionaires: 43
• Average tax cut to millionaires in President Bush's tax package: $93,500
• Number of children in military families that won't get the new child tax credit: 121,000

I don't guarantee their accuracy but if they're true, some of our priorities are seriously askew.

If you search the news sites, you'll find about fifty stories saying that, according to those close to him, Arnold Schwarzenegger has definitely decided not to run for governor of California. (Reuters: "Schwarzenegger to Terminate Governor Bid.")

You'll also find another fifty in which his official reps deny that he's made up his mind. (New York Times: "Schwarzenegger and Top Ally Mum as Filing Deadline Nears.")

I still think he won't run. I think he's milking this to get as much publicity as possible, to screw around a little with the press, and perhaps to get maximum attention when he tells his supporters that he won't be a candidate but wants them all to support his pal, Richard Riordan.

The filing deadline is Saturday, August 9. The current plan is for Arnold to appear with Jay Leno on Wednesday, August 6, to announce his decision. This is a smart move by Arnold to get attention and a smart move by Jay to get ratings. (Not that either needs it. Leno's ratings are through the roof lately. Near the end of Letterman's first year on CBS, that network's publicists were encouraging journalists to write articles that said the Late Night Wars were over and Dave was the once and future victor. Now, NBC's publicists are quietly hinting that the same story should be written, but with some nouns reversed.)

If Riordan runs, I'll probably vote for him to become the new governor. I can't think of anyone, Democrat or Republican, who's likely to be on the ballot I would prefer. But I'm also planning to vote "no" on the whole recall idea because I think it's an affront to the election process.

Paul Krugman on why we have a budget crisis in California and why, in his opinion, the federal goverment has most of the same problems.

A man named John Andrew lost his job. Okay, that happens. Then Bush's economic advisors did a tour that brought them near where John lives and used to work. Read what happened over at www.jobforjohn.com.

Kevin Smith is scheduled to be on The Tonight Show tomorrow night (Friday) with tape he shot at the Comic-Con International in San Diego.

Timothy Noah on why Condoleezza Rice's explanation doesn't make sense.

Remember how smart I said Ben Varkentine was to give a rave review to my new book, Wertham Was Right? Well, it turns out that Kenneth Plume over at IGN-FilmForce is equally smart.

It's probably rude to "review" a tribute drawing but I was struck by the way many of the political cartoonists (linked below) either didn't draw a very good Bob Hope or simply avoided having to do so. This man is not hard to draw, especially if you've seen the simple caricature that served as the basis of the long-running DC comic book. It was designed by Owen Fitzgerald but the drawing above is by one of his successors on the comic, Mort Drucker…the "definitive caricaturist" of Bob Hope, as far as I'm concerned. Mr. Drucker is also the definitive caricaturist of most other celebrities but we needn't dwell on that at the moment.

There was always something about the rendition of Hope in the comic that not only made him work as a funnybook character but caused you to read the dialogue with Bob's voice and delivery in your head. Worked for me, anyway.

Here's a medley of political cartoons about the passing of Bob Hope. You may note that in his honor, they repeat a lot of the same gags over and over.