As we all (sadly) know, Senator Paul Wellstone of Minnesota was killed in a plane crash, and it's up to Governor Jesse Ventura to appoint his replacement until such time as the victor in next Tuesday's election can take over.  The Governor initially said he'd pick a Democrat since Wellstone was a Democrat but, after deciding he'd been exploited at the memorial service, Ventura now says he might choose otherwise.  In the meantime, as this article explains, there is some dispute among the governor's legal advisors as to whether the appointment lasts until the winner is certified or until Wellstone's term expires.

Isn't this a no-brainer?  Isn't it obvious that Ventura should announce (if possible, before the voting) that, barring a Florida-style dispute, he'll appoint Tuesday's winner?  This would be the voters of his state picking their interim senator, which is way more democratic than the governor picking.  It would also give the state's new senator a little head start in setting up his office, hiring his staff, learning the lay of the land, finding a place to live in Washington, etc.  Best of all, it would neutralize the argument over the term of this appointment, which could get very nasty if it affects the balance of power in the Senate.

Democrats might not like the notion since there's the chance the Republican will win the state and if he immediately takes office, it would empower the G.O.P. side of the Senate right away.  They're still counting on Ventura picking a Democrat since Wellstone was one.  Republicans might not like the notion since they're running behind in Minnesota and, if they lose, it will give Walter Mondale that jump instead of some lame duck.  But Ventura is supposed to be an Independent, and what would be more independent than pissing off both major parties and giving the power to the people?

When Ventura was a professional wrestler, he initially billed himself as "The Body."  Later, he insisted that everyone refer to him as "The Brain."  He now has the chance to prove that he's the latter.  Let's see if he takes it.

Members of The Writer's Guild are currently voting on four proposals.  Actually, the ballots are already out and I suspect most members have already marked and returned theirs, as I have.  Nevertheless, the arguments continue, growing ever louder and more emotional.  This is the norm for WGA balloting, where discussions often seem to have little to do with the actual issues at hand.

In this case, the real issues have to do with how screen credits on movies are determined.  A committee has proposed four changes in the WGA Credits Manual.  If you're really interested in reading the precise text of the proposals — and I don't recommend doing this — you can download a PDF file (Acrobat format) by clicking here.  Or you can save your sanity and trust me to summarize.

Proposal #1 changes the rules of movie credit arbitrations so that the arbitrators are anonymous, as is the practice in arbitrations of TV credits.  Proposal #2 says basically that the screen credits will be arranged with the writer who made the greatest contribution coming first.  Proposal #3 states that in arbitrations of movies that are adaptations, the arbitrators will give more weight to each writer's choice and arrangement of elements of the source material, rather than to assess the use of basic story elements which any adapter would include.  And Proposal #4 will allow for more disclosure to writers when a "production executive" (that primarily means a producer or director) does a rewrite, and it would also make it easier for that production executive to receive screen credit.

There is almost no argument against #1, and very little against #2.  #3 seems to be double-talk, and I don't get that anyone knows for sure what it would do or why it is necessary.  And there is no real opposition to the "disclosure" part of the fourth proposal.  It is the last half of that fourth Proposal #4 that has prompted 95% of the yelling.  For reasons I outlined here, I think that change is a bad idea and have cast my vote against it.

I suspect the fourth proposal will not pass and further suspect that it may take the three less controversial proposals down to defeat with it.  That is, many members will just vote "no" on the entire ballot out of protest and disgust at #4 and/or at any attempt to change the rules.  A lot of our members seem to believe that the system is flawed but at the same time, they're suspicious of any attempt to change anything.  The "nays" on the first three propositions will be interpreted, probably correctly, as the votes of that faction.  If it turns out there are enough of them, we probably won't see any further attempt to rewrite the rulebook for a long time.

• Hey, Lucky Duckies! by Paul Krugman, The New York Times
• One for the Ages by Arianna Huffington, Arianna Online
• What Did Dubya Do In The War, Daddy? by Linda McQuaig, The Toronto Star

And here's a link to an article in The New York Times about the Garry Trudeau interview.  Just in case you're interested.

The TV show 60 Minutes II did a segment the other night on comics — Marvel, mainly — with a number of quotes from Stan Lee.  I didn't see it.  Yes, many of you wrote to alert me it was on and I thank you for that.  But my interest in the current comic book industry and its health is an intermittent interest, at best.

However, I did read this article on the CBS website that summarizes the story.  And I did receive a few e-mails from folks who were upset that Stan was identified as "the creator of Spider-Man" and that there was no mention of Steve Ditko.  I have no inside info on this but I must note that Stan has been very conscientious lately about referring to himself as a "co-creator" (where applicable) and that in other interviews, barring awkward time constraints, he's mentioned Ditko or Kirby or other collaborators.

Here's my assumption: The producers of the segment must have known about Ditko.  His name was on the movie and even the slightest bit of research yields the info that he co-created Spider-Man.  But Mr. Ditko does not give interviews, and newspeople don't like to admit that they couldn't get to a vital part of a story.  My guess is they decided to just omit him from the piece and to not use any footage where Stan mentioned him.  Ditko not only went unmentioned in the interviews of Mr. Lee that made it to the air but he wasn't mentioned in the host's narration or the article on the website, either.  That wasn't Stan's doing.

Let's not dump on Stan Lee.  He's had enough headaches, lately.  This Internet site is selling stock certificates from my old employer, Stan Lee Media.  They're $89.99 each, marked down from $499.99.  The last time the stock was listed for the now-defunct company, it was trading at three cents a share.

I just received copies of the new issue of Comic Book Artist, which is devoted this time to the history of Gold Key Comics.  I'll post a fuller plug in a few days but I did want to mention that it's terrific.  I worked for the company (and am interviewed) but even I learned a lot about the operation.  Those of you who lament that so much of comic book history has gone unrecorded should take note: Comic Book Artist is doing a superb job.

John Lahr remembers Adolph Green in this piece for The New Yorker.  Don't miss the last two lines.

Sorry to hear of the demise of one of my favorite publications, Show Music.  Each time an issue arrived, I'd flip through it, get hooked, and have to read most of the issue and order at least three CDs or books that were advertised or reviewed therein.  The magazine did a fine job of covering the world of musical comedy, not just on Broadway but around the world.  Five years ago, I had subscriptions to around 20 magazines.  Now, it's down to around four.  Some of that is due to certain publications becoming more readily available on the Internet.  But some of that is because a lot of darn good magazines just aren't being published anymore.

Happy Halloween.  My buddy Scott Shaw! has a treat, not a trick, up for his Oddball Comics feature over at Comic Book Resources.  There, you can read the entirety of "The Monster of Dread End," a story that John Stanley wrote for Dell's Ghost Stories comic in 1962.  As explained here, Dell had just separated from its alliance with Western Publishing and was starting a whole new line of comics, most of which weren't that wonderful.  Most of the exceptions were the Dells written (and occasionally drawn) by John Stanley, who is now best remembered as the fine, talented writer of the Little Lulu comic books.  He did a few uncharacteristic forays into scary comics and they were genuinely scary in a way that scary comics rarely are.  A lot of us got chills when we read the tale that Scott makes available today, and it became a well-remembered moment in an otherwise long-forgotten comic book.  If you'd like to be creeped out a little, go read it by clicking here.

I couldn't resist.  A new hardcover edition has been released of Moss Hart's autobiography, Act One, and I just ordered a copy from Amazon even though I already own several copies.  My reason — and if you're the kind of person who comes often to this site, I think you'll get this — is that this particular book meant a lot to me.  I got a copy (a first printing hardcover) when I was 13 or so and have since read it over and over…especially the second half.  That copy started to get shabby and soiled so I eventually stopped handling it and, when I felt like giving one section a reread thereafter, went for a paperback reissue.

The words, of course, were the same but I had a sentimental attachment to that hardcover first printing.  The new hardcover is a near-perfect replica of that original.  Somehow, I think I'll enjoy rereading the book even more in that form.  You understand.

Act One is not quite an autobiography since Hart died before he could write Act Two.  Its first part covers his childhood and the days he spent as a social director in the Catskills, developing the wit and flair that would later serve him as one of Broadway's top writers and directors.  The second part — of vastly more interest — tells how he wrote his first Broadway success…actually, co-wrote it with George S. Kaufman and then repeatedly rewrote it throughout out-of-town tryouts.  Hart's account is apparently not completely accurate.  He omitted a couple of earlier theatrical endeavors, at least one of which was actually produced, presumably to make himself appear more the novice when he teamed up with Kaufman.  But the tale he relates is very colorful and funny and warm and wonderful, and a fine inspiration for anyone who aspires to write.  Or to do almost anything where the odds are against you.

Naturally, I'm going to provide a link so you can order your own copy from Amazon.  Here is that link.  Use it in good health.

When you run for public office, you want to get endorsements from people who are respected…whose expertise will cause the public to say, "Well, he must know who the better candidate is."  Tom Golisano, who's running for governor of New York, has reached out to the ultimate authority to bolster his candidacy.  Golisano's people are currently running a "man-on-the-street" TV spot which has various New Yorkers telling why they're voting for the guy…and one of them is The World's Foremost Authority, Professor Irwin Corey.  Think I'm making this up?  Click here to view this commercial in Windows Media format.  You see that old guy, second from the end?  That's Irwin Corey.

No word yet on whether the Pataki for Governor campaign is going to secure that all-important endorsement from Rip Taylor.

If you live in Southern California and have even the slightest love for Dr. Hugo Z. Hackenbush, get your butt down to the Hermosa Beach Playhouse before November 10.  Marxmeister Frank Ferrante is holding court in An Evening With Groucho and a wonderful evening it is.  Some of you may have seen Ferrante portray The Man in Groucho: A Life in Revue, which ran not long ago on PBS.  I thought he captured about 90% of Groucho in that, which would be more than enough to make him worth seeing.  To my delight, he has since nailed down pretty much all of the other 10% including — amazingly — a Groucho-quality ability to ad-lib with the audience.  That is not easy to do, as many lesser men have proven with inept Groucho impressions.

Most of the show is Frank/Groucho telling anecdotes about the Marx Brothers and singing all the songs you'd expect…plus one inspired, more recent one you wouldn't. (I won't tip the surprise.)  Accompanied expertly by Jim Furmston at the piano, Ferrante is in terrific voice throughout.  This is particularly impressive since he spends much of the time leaping about the stage and theater, replicating Groucho dances with uncanny stamina.  The man even moves like Captain Spaulding and, when bantering with patrons, thinks like him, as well.  I cannot imagine a finer, more entertaining re-creation.

Info on tickets to the Hermosa Beach Playhouse can be obtained by visiting this website.  And if you don't reside close enough to spend An Evening With Groucho there, check out Frank Ferrante's website and see when he's coming to your neck of the woods.  He's all over the place.

As I mentioned here recently, I almost never "buy" those TV-movies where some movie or TV star is played by another actor…but this is something different.  For one thing, it's stage, which brings with it a different sense of reality and suspension of disbelief.  For another, Frank Ferrante has Groucho down cold.  He speaks as himself at the beginning and when he does so again at the end, it's a bit jarring.  Because by then, he's made you forget he's not really the guy he's convinced you he is.

Do you get the feeling I really liked this?

We told you a few weeks ago about John Parkin, who is a professional John Cleese imitator.  This was mentioned because we thought it was amazing that there was actually a professional John Cleese imitator out there.  Well, it turns out there are two.  The first photo above is of the real Mr. Cleese, the second is of Mr. Parkin…and the photo at right is Ed Wells, who is also a professional John Cleese imitator.  (He even has a website.)  Personally, I think Mr. Wells looks more like Graham Chapman but what do I know?

I'll save you the trouble of watching all the various polls and fretting over what will happen November 5 in terms of the House and/or Senate swinging to one party or the other: It's too close to tell.  Too many races are too close for anyone to predict, with any validity, whether the Democrats will take back the House, lose the Senate, whatever.  It looks like a Democratic pick-up of a few governorships but, on a national basis, that's close to meaningless.

Still, as Jack Germond once said of his profession (reporting), "We aren't paid to say, 'I don't know,' even when we don't know."  So we're now getting a lot of stories that say the polls indicate a slight lead for this party or a hint of momentum for the other.  It's all just space-filler, often accomplished by ignoring the polls' margin of error or the fact that, in many races, various polls are yielding close but conflicting results.  In about 75% of the competitions, you can find a poll showing your guy leading by 3% with a margin of error of 3%.

One exception is the governor's race in California.  Latest polls show the slimy guy who mismanaged the energy crisis leading the inept, untrustworthy rich guy by 45% to 35%.  If "None of the Above" were on the ballot, we'd see a landslide.

Several of you simultaneously sent me a link to this Washington Post profile of Bob Newhart.  Good article, terrible photo.  I saw Mr. Newhart in a restaurant a few months ago and he looked a good 30 years younger than that picture.

Lou Scheimer was the mover-and-shaker behind Filmation Studios, producers of Fat Albert and the Cosby Kids, The Archies, He-Man and many other cartoon shows from the late sixties until 1989.  Memorabilia (mainly cels) from that industrious enterprise can be purchased over at this site, while Lou's new production company is located over at this site.  Either one will give you details on a big reunion party of former Filmation employees that's taking place November 2.  (I won't be there.  I only wrote one script for the studio.)

I haven't seen Auto-Focus, the new movie about the life and sleaze of Hogan's Heroes star, Bob Crane…and the more I hear of it, the less I want to catch it.  Earlier today, I saw its director, Paul Schrader, interviewed and he said (approximately), "This is the story of a man whose acting career was ruined by sexual addiction."  I don't know from sexual addiction; not sure what it is or whether Mr. Crane had it, whatever it is.  An actor I know who knew Crane well says that he wasn't sick.  He was just a very horny guy who had the good fortune to have women falling over him and the bad fortune to get murdered.

So I don't feel qualified to discuss sexual addiction but I can address the matter of his career, which didn't exactly end after Hogan's Heroes.  But it could easily have, for reasons other than the sex-related ones the film apparently postulates.  There were certainly a lot of folks who starred in sixties' TV shows — especially the broader, gimmicky ones — whose careers pretty much stopped when the series got cancelled.  What happened to Robert Vaughn after The Man From U.N.C.L.E.?  To Adam West after Batman?  What were the other acting jobs awaiting the cast of The Monkees?  Some stars go on to other shows and others, for arguable but non-sexual reasons, simply don't.  Given that a lot of people thought Hogan's Heroes was an embarrassment (I don't but many did), Crane's post-Hogan career of guest shots, movies and even another series doesn't strike me as inexplicably sparse.

My friend who knew him well says, "Bob thought he was going to be the new Jack Lemmon.  He didn't realize that, first of all, the old Jack Lemmon was still around to get all those parts.  He also didn't realize he wasn't as good as Jack Lemmon."  Both those points sound valid to me.  Perhaps Crane also alienated potential employers because of his sexual activities but let's not forget that men who cheat on their wives are hardly a rare breed in Hollywood.  They're almost as prevalent as actors who have a hit series and, once it goes off, can't move on to the kind of roles they want.  I suspect that Bob Crane could have ditched the 8mm cameras and taken a vow of celibacy…and today, we'd see him at those Hollywood Collectors' Shows, signing Hogan's Heroes photos and sitting next to the cast of Petticoat Junction.  He might be alive but he'd still be a trivia question.