"You're The Next Stop"

I don't know if this is new or not but I just got a text message from Amazon telling me that I'm the next stop.  A package I ordered is supposed to arrive today and the text shows me a map of where the delivery person is at this moment.  He or she is out in Montebello either on the Santa Ana Freeway near Atlantic or on surface streets near where they cross.  The app says that truck's next stop is my house.

A quick bit of map-consulting yields the info that that's 38 miles from me.  Traffic is heavy so if they do indeed come to me next, that would take 38-41 minutes.  I got the text message at 12:20 so they should be here right about 1:00.  Let's see when it gets here.

Poll Dancing

If you've been reading this blog for a long time and the poll below looks familiar to you, you're right. It was posted here on February 21, 2007. I didn't think much of it then as an accurate gauge of the electorate but let's look at it with an awful lot of hindsight…

Back then the number of people who were okay with a presidential candidate being Donald Trump's age was only a smidge higher than of that presidential candidate being gay.  The latter was still a majority and I'm going to guess that today, when folks are a lot more accepting of gay marriage than they were in 2007, it would matter a lot less.

But there are two main points I want to make about polls like this, one being that there's really only one correct answer to the question, "If your party nominated a generally well-qualified person for president who happened to be [see below], would you vote for that person?"  That answer is "It would depend on who the person was,  who would win if they didn't, and how those two folks stand on certain issues that matter to me."

We don't vote for a Hispanic or a 72-year-old person or a thrice-married person.  We vote for a specific person who happens to be Hispanic, happens to be 72 or older, etc.  For each "see below" above, there are candidates for whom I'd vote and others for whom I wouldn't.  And of course, the alternative would matter because in many cases, we don't vote for someone as we vote against their opponent.

I dunno who the Democratic nominee will be but I'm sure there are voters who'll vote for him or her largely because he or she is not Donald Trump.  The more I read about Mike Bloomberg, the less I like the idea of him as President of These United States.  But I'm starting to think he'd be the hardest of the current contenders for Trump to beat and that might turn out to be the silver lining in his getting the nomination if that were to happen.  (Note to Mike, who I'm sure devours this blog every day: Start answering every question about Trump with the phrase, "Well, speaking as an actual billionaire…")

As I've stated, I don't know whether to mark my ballot for the person I think would make the best president or for the person who is most likely to oust our worst.  I was hoping that by the time I had to decide, I'd be convinced they were the same person and I wouldn't have to make that decision.  Doesn't look that way…

And then there's also the other point I want to make.  I haven't seen a current poll on how many people wouldn't vote for a homosexual but if someone conducts one, I hope they also ask this relevant question of those who answer that they wouldn't: Would you vote for Pete Buttigieg if he had the exact same qualifications and platform but he was straight? I'm guessing that most voters who wouldn't vote for a gay man or woman are voters who also wouldn't vote for a Democrat. Mayor Pete's sexual orientation might not cost him many actual votes. I'm curious as to how many.

Before I go: This actually came to me in a dream the other night. It was Trump debating his rival, Buttigieg…and I'm not predicting Buttigieg will be the nominee or that Trump will even debate whoever is. Hell, I'm still reminding folks that it's not impossible that before August when the Republican Convention convenes at the Spectrum Center — named like so many convention centers for some company that can't get our Internet connections to work right — a scandal or criminal charge will drive Donald from the ticket. That's not a prediction. I don't think it'll happen. It's just fun to remember that it's not impossible.

Anyway, in the dream, the two men are debating and Donald makes some crack about his opponent not being a real man or a moral man or someone whose lifestyle God would approves of. And when it's Mayor Pete's turn to talk, assuming Trump lets him have one, he says, "I know you don't understand this, Mr. President, but I am devoted to my mate in every way. For instance, if he were to take ill, I would be at his side to take care of him instead of…oh, say, going out and banging a porn star!"

I don't think it will happen but, again, it's just fun to remember that it's not impossible.

Dark Crystal

I will still buy their product by the gallon(s) but I no longer have the same good feeling that I had about Crystal Geyser brand water.

Today's Video Link

Here's behind-the-scenes footage from The Andy Griffith Show with Andy, Ron Howard, Don Knotts, Frances Bavier and all the rest, including my beloved neighbor, Betty Lynn. This is home movie footage taken by Ron Howard's family, which would explain why the camera lingers so much on Ron and his younger brother, Clint. Hey, there's something I have in common with Ron: I have home movies with Betty Lynn in them, too. Thanks to Edward Fields, who told me about this video…

Recommended Reading

If you're starting to think that Michael Bloomberg might be the best candidate the Democrats could nominate, wait a little bit.  And read Kevin Drum as to why you should wait a little bit before expending any of your rooting interest on the guy.  Most candidates look good before they reach the stage where the press is digging into their backgrounds and so is whoever's running against them.  We're just reaching the point where Bloomberg is being subjected to a lot of that.

And if you're worried that Trump can't be beaten, read Josh Marshall.  This is not the time to panic.  The time to panic will be when Josh Marshall panics.

Friday Evening

No, I still haven't figured out who I'm going to vote for in the California Primary, perhaps because I still haven't decided if I should vote for the person I think would be the best President or the person I think would be the best candidate. If it's the latter, I'm concerned Mike Bloomberg can't attract the black vote and I'm wondering what the black vote for him is like in those polls that show him nine points ahead of Trump.

Bernie seems to be running strong but as others have noted, the Trump Attack Machine really hasn't turned its guns of him to tell us that if America elects Bernie, it will go Communist within two years and they'll take away everyone's freedom, chocolate, puppy dogs, Christianity and Netflix. I also think someone has to ask the question of what happens if Sanders becomes the candidate and experiences another heart attack like he did last October. Trump got a lot of mileage out of insisting Hillary was on the verge of death.

It's times like this I have to remember that my vote is not going to determine the outcome. As hard as it may be to believe, it might not even be one of the major factors.


Several of you are now sending me long essays recalling the first comic book you recall buying. If you want to, fine. I'll read 'em but please remember that I rarely post articles by anyone else on this blog — maybe one out every 500 I receive. Don't waste your time if you think I'm going to turn the floor over to you.


The transfer of my Randy Rainbow tickets last week went through the good offices of Ticketmaster. They are now sending me e-mails that tell me if I enjoyed Randy, I'm sure to enjoy tickets to see the Kings play the Clippers and/or the Celtics play the Lakers. Unless those teams are now made up of gay guys singing song parodies about Rudy Giuliani, I fail to see the connection.


I said earlier that the first Jay Ward show was Rocky and His Friends in 1959. Several of you wrote to ask, "What about Crusader Rabbit?" Yes, well, what about Crusader Rabbit? Jay was one of the producers but it wasn't his studio, his name wasn't on it, no one thinks of it in the same way as the real Jay Ward shows…


Lastly: The Ahmanson Theater in Downtown Los Angeles is mounting a new production of one of my favorite musicals, 1776, this summer and cheapo tickets are now on sale. Before you rush to scoop up any of them, you should know two things, one being that some of the dates overlap with Comic-Con in San Diego. So if you're going to that, as a good many readers of this blog are, that will impact which dates you can go see 1776.

Second thing: This new production is rumored to involve "non-traditional casting," which I guess means black and/or female performers playing the white guys who founded this country. I am all for casting the best actors available, regardless of race or gender, but maybe that doesn't work for every single show. It seems to me that the fact that anyone who wasn't male or white didn't have a seat at the table is one of the important parts of this play.

I am absolutely not condemning a production I haven't seen yet — which may not even have been fully cast yet — but I'm a bit skeptical. Since it's only a bit, I bought tickets but not expensive ones. At this link, you can procure seats for the clever price of $17.76 or slightly better ones, also at well below usual Ahmanson tariffs. They also have $17.76 tickets at Goldstar. Purchase at your own risk. I hope "non-traditional casting" doesn't give us a John Adams who is not the least bit obnoxious or disliked.

ASK me: My First Funnybooks

Joe Petchik wrote me to inquire…

I've seen you joke that you started reading comic books right out of the womb and that when the doctor spanked you, you dropped a copy of Mickey Mouse. But really, do you remember your first comic book? And when you began working in comics, did you work with any of the people who'd worked on that comic?

No to remembering my first but it was probably a Dell and it probably featured some cartoon character I already knew from TV. Might have been a Disney, might have been a Warner Brothers. I remember as a kid buying (or having my parents buy me) every comic book I saw with Hanna-Barbera characters or Jay Ward characters but I'm sure I was reading comics before 1957 when Ruff & Reddy (the first H-B show) debuted. The first Jay Ward show was Rocky and His Friends in 1959.

At one point, my folks gave me the money to send away for a year's subscription to the Dell Comic of my choosing, which cost an entire buck for twelve issues. I sent off the coupon for Looney Tunes and for some reason, they proceeded to send me the next dozen issues of Tom & Jerry. The error, which I guess is what it was, didn't bother me that much because I collected that comic, too. What did bother me was that subscription copies came folded.

When I began writing for Western Publishing on their Gold Key Comics in 1971 and later in the seventies when I ran the Hanna-Barbera comic book department, I worked with lots of people who'd produced Dell Comics in the fifties. That list would include Pete Alvarado, Karran "Kay" Wright, Dan Spiegle, Tom McKimson, Phil DeLara, Tony Strobl, Don R. Christensen, Del Connell, John Carey and Chase Craig.

I also became good friends for a time (and collaborated) with Alex Toth, and I know I read some of the Zorro comics he did under the Dell logo in the late fifties. (If you are baffled, as so many are, about the relationship between Dell Comics and Gold Key Comics, perhaps my greatest contribution to comic book fandom is to have explained it here.)

However, I can identify the first super-hero comic book I read. It was Action Comics #250, cover-dated March of 1959 although the copy I first read did not have a cover on it. It appeared on newsstands in January of '59 but I didn't buy or read the comic then. A year or so later, there was a charity-type bazaar at Westwood Elementary School, the place where you could then find me most weekdays. There were games and a big bake sale and in one room, an array of stuff for sale that looked not unlike a swap meet. There, I found for sale, bundles of comic books missing all or a third of their covers.

Comic book fans of my age or older will know what this was. They sold comic books in those days on newsstands which took them on a returnable basis. A newsstand got, say, twenty copies of the new World's Finest Comics and put them out for sale. At any point, though usually when the next issue of World's Finest came in, the newsstand could send back the unsold copies — including any that got damaged by kids pawing through the racks — for full credit. They only paid for what they sold.

The returns went back to the regional distributor. In a few cities, those distributors would yank out the damaged books and ship the still-sellable ones overseas to certain distributors there to sell. In all cities, books that would remain officially unsold would be made unsellable by having crews — and this was done mainly by hand — tear the covers off the comics. In some cases, they'd just tear off the top third of the cover containing the title logo and issue number. The covers or partial covers would go to the national distributor to prove the books were not sold; ergo, the distributor didn't have to pay for them either.

The remainder of each comic was supposed to be pulped but in truth, a lot of them were sold unscrupulously through various outlets either coverless or with the partial covers. Some newsstands and second-hand bookstores had them. People sold them at swap meets. In San Diego, there was a used book shop where at any given time, you could go in and select from thousands of recent coverless comics for a nickel each or 25 for a dollar. And in various shops that were not unlike today's Dollar Tree or 99-Cents-Only shops, you could buy bundles of these comics — sealed in plastic bags or tied-up with twine — for similar cut rates.

The problem with those bundles of course is that you could usually only see the top comic in each bundle and you didn't know what else you were purchasing. If you bought ten bundles, you might get them home and find out that they all had the exact same books with a different one in first position. Or you might get a bundle with a lot of comics that you already had or didn't want to read no matter how cheap they were.

That day at the Westwood Elementary School Bazaar, I bought one bundle because it had a Woody Woodpecker comic or a Daffy Duck or something like that showing. And that's how I got my first super-hero comic book — that Action Comics #250.

I knew Superman from the George Reeves TV show and also from the old Paramount cartoons on local TV. I liked Superman and I can't really tell you why I hadn't bought his comic books before then. But I read that comic, liked it and soon was buying super-hero comics to the point of crowding out the "funny" comics that had previously made up my collection.

I even went to the extreme of hauling my boxes of Bugs Bunny and Donald Duck to a local second-hand bookstore where you could trade them in on a two-for-one deal. For every 100 Disney comics, I could take home 50 Batman or Superman books. I even found a copy of Action Comics #250 with a cover. Many years later, I would start buying replacement copies of the books I'd traded-in.

In the meantime, I bought super-hero comics from the used book stores and new ones off the comic book rack. I'm fairly sure the first one I bought new was Superman's Pal, Jimmy Olsen #45 with a cover date of June 1960. It came out in April of that year.

So that Action #250 was my first. As for working with the folks who worked on it: Curt Swan drew the cover. I got to spend time with Curt and get to know him but several times when he was about to draw something I'd written, he got yanked away for another assignment so that never happened. The Superman story in that issue was written by Bill Finger (I met him briefly) and drawn by Wayne Boring (Never worked with him but we exchanged mail).

In the back of the comic was a story of Congorilla, written by Robert Bernstein and drawn by Howard Sherman, neither of whom I ever knew. There was also a Tommy Tomorrow story written by Otto Binder and drawn by Jim Mooney. I never met Otto but I'm proud that I got to know Jim Mooney and work with him on a few things. He was a terrific guy, a terrific artist and very, very prolific. Every so often when we were talking or having dinner together, I would say to myself, "This is the guy who drew that Tommy Tomorrow story you read when you were eight years old." It's still a little hard for me to accept that that was humanly possible.

ASK me

Happy Valentine's Day!

I post this here on Valentine's Day in every even-numbered year. If the teacher in this story did that today, we would all have been plunged into a discussion about the propriety of teaching Gay Marriage…

Among the many joys of today is that I am no longer subjected to a humiliating ritual of elementary school.  It was that on this holiday, we all had to buy valentines for everyone in our class, even of the same sex.

I guess it was someone's solution to the problem of avoiding the "Charlie Brown" problem of a kid not getting any, or not getting as many as someone else…or something.  But a week before 2/14, the teacher would pass out a list of all the students to everyone, and we all had to go out and buy those boxes of cheapo valentines (usually depicting cartoon characters) and address one to each of our classmates, including the ones whose guts we hated.  One year I remember, we had 36 students in my class, plus I needed one for the teacher and two for the teaching assistants.  I didn't need one for me, so that meant 38.

Unfortunately, the stores I went to that year didn't sell boxes of 38 or even 40.  They all seemed to be multiples of 25 or 30, which meant buying two boxes.  The extras were handy, though.  Not wishing to send another guy a card with the slightest romantic suggestion, I had to reject a lot of them.  If it said, "Will you be my valentine?", I could send it to a girl but not to another boy.  It was just too embarrassing.  If I'd given Louis Farrell the card that said, "Be My Valentine, Cutie," I'd still be hearing gay jokes.

Most of the other guys managed to find (or make) cards that just said "Happy Valentine's Day" to give to others of like gender — but somehow, even the year I bought an extra box, I didn't have enough non-sexual ones for the males in my class.  I had to sit there and decide which guy was going to get the one that said, "Let's Be Valentine Buddies."  It went to the one I figured was least likely to use it against me.  The card makers seem to have gotten hip to this dilemma and most of those I now see in stores are about as non-romantic as they can get and still pass the things off as Valentine's Day cards.

The teacher usually assigned a student to tally everyone's valentines and make sure no one got shorted.  If you were short — say, you didn't fill out one for dumb ol' Sidney Passey — you had to quickly hand-make one.  One year, a student enrolled in our class on 2/13 and everyone had to whip up a card for this kid who was darn near a total stranger to us.  I wrote on mine, "Happy Valentine's Day, Whoever You Are."

I'm glad I don't have to do that anymore.  Now, I look back and marvel at how the school system managed to take a neat idea like Valentine's Day, drain it of all its meaning and turn it into an ordeal.  But then, they did that with just about everything.

Sid & Marty

Our pal Matt Hurwitz wrote a nice piece on Sid and Marty Krofft for Variety. You have no idea what an experience it was to work for that company.

Today's Video Link

My favorite one-man singing group, Julien Neel, favors us with a very old song written a few years ago by Randy Newman. Notice that when you're the one with the red tie, you get to sing lead…

My Latest Tweet

  • If I were Pete Rose, I'd hurry and get a bet down on whether or not I'm going to finally get into the Hall of Fame.

My Latest Tweet

  • Apparently, not only could Trump shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and not lose any votes but anyone who shows loyalty to him could do it and not spend a day in prison.

Political Stuff

So today, everyone's saying Biden is through and they were saying that about Elizabeth Warren a week or two ago. Yeah, it looks that way but we forget that in primaries, lots of folks have their moment of inevitability either way. There was a moment not that long ago when Rick Santorum, Herman Cain, Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann all looked like the presumptive Republican nominee. Someone should dig up that clip of Newt on Fox News explaining why, mathematically, no one could possibly beat him…and then he didn't even come in second or third.

Yeah, it looks bad for Biden but I think two primaries in small states is too soon to count anyone out. I'm not saying he'll get the nomination or he won't; just that it looks less likely than it did a few weeks ago. I'm sensing that we will soon have a moment when Mike Bloomberg looks like he has a lock on it…and it may turn out to be like Newt's unstoppability.

I still haven't decided who I'm going to vote for in the California primary. I'm leaning Bernie but I can't help but think that the label "Socialist" — and to a lesser extent, his recent heart problems — gives the Trump Slander Machine way too much to work with.

In the meantime, if you're panicked that Trump can't be beat, read this piece by Josh Marshall and note that it was posted before the results from New Hampshire. It references the Quinnipiac Poll, which is one of the ones I tend to trust. (The rule is that if you trust the poll when it tells you things you want to believe, you also have to trust it when it tells you things you don't want to believe. I think Quinnipiac is a good indicator either way.) Here's an excerpt from Marshall's piece for those of you too lazy to click over and read the whole thing…

Quinnipiac has head to head match ups with Democrats. All the top candidates beat Trump by significant margins. Bloomberg 51-42, Sanders 51-43, Biden 50-43. There's a lot of information that tells us that President Trump can definitely win reelection. But these numbers all point to an incumbent who has an uphill climb at best. And at least for now there's little evidence suggesting a really different situation than we've had to date.

They also certainly suggest that if you think Sanders is a weak general election candidate that must be based on the predicted effects of attacks that have yet to happen. Because 51-43 is pretty solid.

It is but I think Sanders is the perfect guy for a Trump rallying cry of "He will bring us Communism and destroy the America we love" which will motivate Trump's base and the squishy folks who aren't quite solidly within it. And yes, I agree that winning this year is less about peeling people off from your opponent's base than it us about attracting Undecideds.

Still, "defining your opponent" (i.e., lying about him or her) would be much harder to do that with Mayor Pete (as those who don't know how to pronounce "Buttigieg" call him) or Bloomberg. Both have their weak points but even Trump can't convince his followers that the ninth-richest person in the nation is a Commie.

And I really need to see and hear more about Amy Klobuchar. Maybe we all do.

From the E-Mailbag…

An old e-mail pal of mine, Mark Bernstein, sent me this…

Here's my theory, based on my own experience. Watching the Oscar telecast used to be a must-do for me, but I didn't watch this year. Part of the appeal was being among the first to know who won. I don't need to watch the show for that any more – I can just look it up online, even checking in a couple of times during the evening to see winners lists updated in real time.

For hosts, Jon Stewart was a draw for me, as were Johnny Carson and Bob Hope in years past. Neil Patrick Harris was also appealing, but a much bigger draw for the Tonys (which, admittedly, I watch every year no matter what). But you're right, the host alone doesn't matter much.

I'm also less invested because I go out to movies less often these days, and so haven't seen, well, just about anything. The closest I came to seeing any major nominee was screenplay nominee Knives Out. This year, even the categories I normally have covered were more obscure to me, as I'd only seen three of the Animated Feature nominees and two of the Visual Effects nominees. I find I can be perfectly content waiting a few months to a year and watching most movies at home on my 65" screen.

For those reasons, I'm guessing the ratings will continue to decline.

I think you're right, Mark, but I'll add on that I think one of the reasons we used to watch the Oscars was that it was a live show and there was the very real chance that something unplanned would happen.

Someone would streak, someone would cuss, someone would fall on their ass, someone would have an emotional breakdown, someone would stage a political protest…something unexpected and you didn't want to miss it. I also think that when Saturday Night Live started up, it had a real sense of danger about it and you didn't want to not be watching the night someone said the F-word or flashed some naked body part or the set fell over.

We don't worry these days about missing a live moment. If someone on the Oscars mooned the camera, there would be ninety clips of it on YouTube within twenty minutes. Matter of fact, a perfectly fine way to watch the Academy Awards — in many ways far better than sitting through a three-hours-and-twenty-minutes show — is just to watch highlights online.

That may be Reason Numero Uno that the ratings ain't what they used to be; that and the fact that so many nominations are for movies we didn't see. Somewhere out there, there are folks whose job it is to boost those ratings and it must be frustrating to them that they can't control what gets nominated and who wins.

But I think television really changed when most of us got VCRs and gained the ability to tape a show, watch it when we wanted to (or over and over) and to fast-forward through the dull parts. And it changed a lot more when enough of it became available the next day on the Internet.

Today's Video Links

Almost two years ago, a reader of this site sent me the link to the first video below.  It's from a production of Little Shop of Horrors and I thought the design and puppetry of Audrey II in this was the best I'd ever seen.  Take a look and see if you don't agree…

I posted it here and asked, "Who built this puppet? Who's working it? Who's doing the voice?" It's taken a while but thanks to some helpful readers of this site and a bit of online detective work, I think I have the answer.

The puppet was built by Dennis Lancaster of Intermission Productions in Tracy, California. And he did a great job on it. The puppeteer who did such an amazing job of operating seems to have been a performer named Kyle Richlin and it may have been an actor named Daniel Simpson as the voice of The Plant. Whoever it was, he was also terrific.

In the meantime, if you're planning on staging Little Shop of Horrors in your school or theater or den and you want to rent the best danged puppets I've ever seen for your presentation, here's a little commercial for Intermission Productions. I don't know what they charge but they probably won't demand your last drop of blood…