Matt Yglesias gives us a good overview of the battle over Health Care in this country. Apparently, what's going to happen is that a lot of folks will be losing their insurance or paying a lot more for it and the Republican response will be to (a) deny that's so and (b) to say, "Nonsense! It's available to them and don't blame us if they claim it isn't!" Or something like that. I'm waiting for someone to ask Trump, "Does this bill that your party wants to pass and you to sign fulfill what you promised on the campaign trail?" Because there's no way it comes close to that.

I'm still amazed there are people in this country who, when asked about Donald Trump, say they like him because he's honest and he speaks his mind and he tells it like it is. I can understand those who think he's a con man and a liar who's going to do a lot of things they want done, including beating up on immigrants and making rich people a lot richer at the expense of the poor and middle-class. I can't understand how they can still defend as honest, a man who insists he got a lot more electoral votes than other presidents who got a lot more electoral votes.

Last night, I went to see Puppet Up!, which is a show the Henson people have been doing, mostly in and around Los Angeles, for a few years now. Even before their company sold Kermit, Miss Piggy, Fozzie and the rest to The Mouse, they've been developing other franchises and ventures and this is one of them. Basically, it's a puppet show that is almost wholly improvised based on suggestions from the audience, and intended for adults. They sell alcohol before, during and after the show and its purchase and consumption are highly encouraged. And encouraged. And encouraged.

One interesting thing about the two shows they did last evening: It's one of the first times, if not the first, that a public event like that has been done at what most folks call The Chaplin Studios. It's that studio every Angeleno drives by all the time at the southeast corner of La Brea Avenue and Sunset Boulevard. Built in 1917 by Charlie Chaplin, it has changed hands often since he sold it in 1953. Red Skelton owned it for a time. So did Herb Alpert. So did others.

The George Reeves Adventures of Superman show was filmed there. So was the Raymond Burr Perry Mason series. So were Soul Train and loads of music videos. The Henson family bought the place in 2000 and set up shop there. They do much of what they do there and also rent out office space to others. I've been on that lot many times and it seems like a nice, friendly place to work.

Puppet Up! has played at many local venues like The Kirk Douglas Theater in Culver City but this is the first time they did it on the lot, converting (for the night) the largest soundstage into a comedy club with tables and chairs and an amazingly-effective stage area. That was one of the impressive things.

Another was the show itself which was enormously fun and entertaining and, since it's almost all improv, the kind of thing you could go back to again and again and again. They didn't advertise this much but the two shows apparently sold out instantly, most tix going to folks who'd seen it before and wanted to bring friends. No other performances have currently been announced but I got the feeling there'll be a lot of them and they'll do them there. You could kinda tell Brian Henson and his crew were delighted with how well it all went.

Brian is the sub-host of the proceedings and he got on stage for one segment in which a member of the audience — deliberately chosen to not be experienced in puppetry — was dragged up there, outfitted with a puppet and stuck into a scene so all could laugh at his ineptness. Apart from him, the performances were by six skilled Muppeteers (Oops — can't call 'em that; Disney owns the word) puppeteers who operate a wide array of characters you never saw before and who improvise scenes.

There was no printed program so I can't copy info here from it but I might remember all their names: Drew Massey, Victor Yerrid, Colleen Smith, Allan Trautman, Ted Michaels and Peggy Etra. If I got a name wrong, don't blame me. Blame whoever decided not to print programs. I do know that the main emcee — who was very, very good at moving things along and extracting suggestions from the audience — was Patrick Bristow.

Another star of the show is the process. I've been on the set of Muppet shoots and it's fascinating to watch the live puppeteers holding their characters aloft and manipulating them and supplying the voices…and then you look over at the monitor and see the scene minus the human beings. Here, you can also do that. The puppeteers are on stage playing to a fixed camera, and on either side of them there are huge screens showing us what that fixed camera sees. Everyone in the house seemed to be looking back and forth between the screens and the performers.

There are also some amazing video effects added in live, and there's a great live band…and twice during the show, they abandoned improvisation to re-create a classic "Muppet" routine, though I'm not sure they ever said the trademarked and sold-to-Disney word. But they did bits that Jim Henson and Frank Oz once performed on The Ed Sullivan Show and elsewhere, and they were great. The whole evening was.

One other observation: The show was somewhat dirty and for the most part, very funny. It did strike me though that the "f" word has either lost its power to evoke laughter on its own or it just seems so outta-place in a puppet show that it doesn't work. It's a potent comedy tool when Lewis Black uses it. Maybe it wouldn't be if he was made of felt.

As I said, no other performances have been announced but I'll bet there will be some. I'll try and let you know if and when I hear about them before they sell out. And when they sell out, it will probably be because people who were there last night want to see it again and want to take friends…as I do.

• ‪Instead of setting our clocks ahead tonight, can we set Washington back to last year?‬

Here's what I did on my 65th birthday. I hosted a program out at the TV Academy on the art/science of new people doing voices of classic characters.

This is a video of the whole thing minus a couple of videos that were shown and which have been edited out for, I assume, copyright purposes. There was a great opening montage you won't see and about halfway through, there was a script reading of an episode of the TV series, Wabbit. The reading is in the video below but then we ran the cartoon and that ain't in the video below. The reading made more sense when you could see how all those strange noises and shrieks the actors did fit into the finished film.

Also, I should mention: I am identified as the Writer/Producer/Director of The Garfield Show. This kind of shorthand occurs so often throughout the business that we rarely correct it…but just for the record, I am a Writer on the show, the Supervising Producer and the Voice Director. There are other writers and other producers, and the guy who gets and deserves the Director credit is a brilliant gent named Philippe Vidal. He actually directs the animation and assembles the finished episodes. I just hire and direct the voice actors for the English language version.

As you'll see, we had a great panel and we only began to talk about this topic, which could be discussed for many, many hours. Here's about 75 minutes on it…

I like darn near everyone in the comic book business and I really like Sid Jacobson and Ernie Colón, two men who have produced an astounding number of funnybooks, primarily for the old Harvey Comics company. When you look at what I'm about to link to, keep in mind that this is the work of the editor and one of the artists for Richie Rich, Casper and Spooky, among many others.

Sid and Ernie have become very prolific and proficient about turning real-life events into "graphic novel" form, where they often become more comprehensible. Recently, they turned the 2014 torture report released by the Senate Intelligence Committee into The Torture Report: A Graphic Adaptation. As you can see from these sample pages, it's very good and very important. You can order a copy of their book here.

In the spirit of Full Disclosure, I should admit that both Sid and Ernie were, for brief and separate times, my editor. I'd make some snide remark about how they obviously understand torture but as it happened, they were both effective and benevolent. Those two things usually go together both in comic book companies and in torture chambers.

Here's another one of those posts where Mark has mixed feelings and can't quite decide how he feels about something…

There's a new podcast series called Missing Richard Simmons. On it, a self-appointed investigator tries to get to the bottom of why the famed exercise guru dropped out of public life not long ago. Is Richard, as rumors have it, being held hostage in his home by a crazed housekeeper?

I listened to the first few installments and I felt a little dirty…like someone was nosing into something that was none of their damned business and I was no better because I was peeking over their shoulder. And I felt a little dirtier when I read this article that seems to say, "Move along, people…nothing to see here!"

If that's so — if all that's happened is that Mr. Simmons wants some time out of the spotlight — then why not let him have it? Why traipse about, interviewing all his acquaintances about him and why ginning up a tabloid-style story about him? Maybe he has the kind of problem that is best treated by being left alone for a while.

I've known famous people who were not entirely comfy with the idea of being famous…of having to "perform" to a certain extent wherever they go, wherever they're recognized. Or maybe they have some deep fear or insecurity about how much they deserve their fame or fortune. Or maybe they just need some "alone" time or privacy to figure out who they are or where they're going. Or maybe, or maybe…

Police investigators have visited Simmons and decided he's not being held prisoner. Why doesn't that settle the matter? Why does he owe us or anyone some explanation for why he doesn't want to be seen on television — or anywhere — right now?

He doesn't but that's not the part about which I have mixed feelings. I just don't know how I feel about Richard Simmons.

I've never actually met the guy but back around 1981, when his daytime talk/exercise show was very popular, its offices were right down the hall from where I was working. I saw Richard almost every day. I heard Richard almost every minute he was in the building. You probably did too, even if your offices were in New Zealand. He was on the loud side.

He was usually running around in his uniform — the little shorts and tank-top that seemed to scream out, "Notice me, notice me!"

He thought nothing of stopping total strangers in the parking lot and telling them they were too fat and would die soon if they didn't do something about it, like buy his exercise tapes or his Deal-a-Meal food management program.

He would also criticize strangers' clothing which, given his own outfit, was like having…well, I can't decide on an analogy here. Bob Dylan telling you to stop mumbling? Larry Flynt telling you to treat women better? Jerry Lewis telling you to keep your ego in check? Pick out one of these or make up your own.

And was there anything the man wouldn't do to get on television, including going on talk shows where the host abused him and treated him like a clown? I used to cringe when I saw him on with Letterman. I had to turn off the radio once when he was on with Howard Stern. Maybe Simmons didn't mind it but it made me real uncomfortable, especially after some gay friends told me how much it bothered them.

I said to one of them once, "You know, this is a guy who has really helped a tremendous amount of people lose a tremendous amount of weight. He's saved a lot of lives." This gay friend replied, "Yeah…and convinced a lot of America that that's how gay people act."

I don't spend a lot of time thinking about Richard Simmons but when I do, I don't know for sure what to think, other than I'm sure I'm glad I no longer have an office down the hall from him. He's a hero to many — deservedly so. He's a joke to many others and maybe even to some of the same people. Whatever he's going through, I think people should just leave him alone and let him go through it. And I sure don't mind not seeing him on television.

North Carolina attorney Jesse Bright sometimes drives for Uber. When he was pulled over by police, he began recording the encounter on his smartphone. The officer kept telling him it was illegal to record him. Bright, who knew the law, refused and here's what happened…

I don't see anyone on the 'net saying anything new or interesting today about the guy in the White House…so no Trump Dump today.

Well, there is this. My buddy Steve Stoliar sent me this link to an article by David Suissa that discusses lying in politics as opposed to bullshit. On some level, I think that's a distinction without a difference…but Trump does seem to be on kind of a roll with some people when it comes to selling them an alternate reality in which they want to live. There are folks out there who can still look at the photos of the National Mall during Obama's first inauguration and Trump's first (and let's hope, only) inauguration and say, "Yep! Donald had a lot more people at his!"

I think though we sometimes devalue the word "lie" by applying it to anything your opponent says that you can possibly spin as untrue. Years ago, a gent who worked for the National Weather Service told me, "We'll predict a 60% chance of rain for Los Angeles…and then even if it rains in the valley but not in the basin, we hear from people in the basin who accuse us of lying. Not even of being wrong, which we weren't. They say we lied."

As a staunch believer in the maxim, "Never attribute to deviousness, that which can be explained by incompetence," I often think the "L" word is inapplicable. People — even people I don't like — do make mistakes. They misspeak. Or they make logical assumptions which turn out to be wrong. A lot of people have jumped on Trump for spelling the word "tap" with two P's in a recent, infamous tweet. These are apparently people who never made a typo themselves.

For months, a lot of pundits were haranguing the press for not using the word "lie" to describe certain statements made by Trump or his surrogates and some reporters are now using it. I dunno how I feel about that. I think false statements by prominent people need to be more clearly identified as such…but saying someone lied suggests a conscious intent to deceive that may not always be present. People do sometimes earnestly believe some pretty ridiculous things. If your neighbor told you he saw Elvis Presley and Bigfoot having sex on your front lawn last night, would you accuse him of lying? That's probably not the right word.

I'm not suggesting untrue statements should not be denounced as untrue. It's just that the word "lie" has become too casual in some circles to be effective, plus it can also be lucrative…or effective. Trump and Ted Cruz, when they were competing for the Republican nomination, both routinely called each other pathological liars. Trump kept referring to "Lyin' Ted." Now, because a relationship seems mutually beneficial, they're dining together and praising each other and Donald hasn't said a word lately about Cruz's wife being homely or his father killing John F. Kennedy.

David Suissa's article is a real "think piece," at least for me. I haven't drawn any firm conclusions from it but I'm going to spend some time pondering it. The man makes some good points and cites some interesting examples. I sure hope he isn't lying about them.

Here from July of 1989 (I believe) is Bernadette Peters on The Tonight Show with Johnny Carson.  She is singing a passionate song about the joys of masturbation. No kidding…

I know a lot of you would prefer I post about TV and comic books and utter trivia but I'm having a hard time wrapping my brain around that stuff when I'm not writing (professionally) TV and comic books and utter trivia. I'll get to that but at the moment, I'm appalled at the misinformation and looming tragedies involving the Republican health care plan.

And yes, I know this is not technically a Trump Dump; more like a Paul Ryan Dump. But Trump's the guy who promised that there would be health care for all and it would be better and cheaper and the government would pay for it. That may well turn out to the single greatest lie ever told by an elected official in this country…and one which actually kills a lot of Americans. Trump's support for this new plan has been tepid. He says it's great but he ain't saying it too loudly because he knows it won't pass and if it did, it certainly wouldn't sync up with his pledge. So here we go…

• Sarah Kliff seems to be the go-to expert for understanding what is being proposed. Here, she points out how almost everything Republicans are doing are things they said they hated about Obamacare.
• Jonathan Chait discusses how Paul Ryan can't even pretend that this plan is intended to do anything more than lower taxes for the really, really rich. I have this feeling that at home, if one of Ryan's children fell and broke a leg and someone said, "What do we do about this?", Ryan would say "I'll handle this!" and he'd rush to the floor of the House and try to pass more tax cuts for the rich.
• The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office is only non-partisan when it's reporting what you want to hear. When it doesn't, it's a bunch of lying hacks who are biased for the opposition…or at least, that's the defense some use against its scoring. Republicans were trying to get their American Health Care Act passed before the C.B.O. could crunch the numbers on it and report but that's not going to happen. So now, according to articles like this one and this one, they're gearing up to attack the C.B.O. and to maybe try and sell a more favorable scoring by folks who work directly for Trump. Alternative facts, indeed.
• And here's Kevin Drum on why so much of the Republican base is expecting a full-scale repeal of Obamacare and why Ryan and others won't or can't explain to them that that isn't possible.

I dunno how this is going to end. It may mean Obamacare stays in place a lot longer than anyone expects…but the health care business can't function for long with that kind of uncertainty. It may mean the Republicans pass a terrible plan that takes away health insurance for millions and then there will be the backlash against that.

It may mean this battle goes on for months and months and months…but again, the health insurance business needs to know where all this is heading. I see no scenario that is going to make everyone happy because one group won't be happy if the poor and sick do get affordable health care and another won't be happy if they don't. Maybe I should write and think more about TV and comic books and utter trivia…

• The GOP: Let's make it easier to get a gun but harder to great treatment for mental illness. Oh, and of course, tax cuts for the rich!

• Jon Huntsman accepted the U.S. ambassadorship to Russia. As a Trump appointee, he swears he has never talked to any Russians and never will.

I have long believed that a lot of the folks who said Obamacare was the worst thing ever — worse than Watergate, the Holocaust, the Spanish Inquisition and cole slaw combined — would have had no problem with it if it had been passed by President Mitt Romney. They didn't really think that arranging health insurance for poor and sick people was comparable to mass genocide or anything of the sort.

The problem was that it was a "win" for that president and a bit of evidence that he and his kind were actually running America. They had a lot of problem with the "Obama" part of "Obamacare." Well now, those people should have no problem with what some are calling "Trumpcare," even though Trump doesn't seem too enthusiastic about it and there's no evidence that he really knows how it works. (It does hand him the problem of how to explain how it matches his election promises.)

Well, according to Jonathan Chait, the far-right has a lot of problems with the "care" part of "Trumpcare." They don't like the idea that the government should even be in the business of providing care to Americans or making sure they can get it. Like Mr. Chait, I think it's refreshing that this motive — which many have had but few have admitted — is coming out into the open. That's what a lot of the arguing is really about.

Most of what I'm reading this week is about the Republican Health Care Plan but there's much to be read about Donald…

• The shameless campaign that was McCarthyism gets distorted or redefined all the time and applied to any sort of crusade by anyone. As Jonathan Chait points out, Donald Trump is not the victim of "McCarthyism" but rather a practitioner of it.
• Adam Davidson tells us about a Trump business deal that says a lot about the man now in the White House.
• I had a friend get mad at me when I said in a private conversation that Trump had the racist vote. He wrongly thought I was saying that anyone who voted for Trump was a racist. I certainly don't think that's so. But I do think those who were already inclined to think that way favor Donald and according to Heidi Beirich of the Southern Poverty Law Center, his election has a lot of racists feeling empowered and more likely to cause trouble.
• And finally, Matt Taibbi cautions that those who expect the Russia Scandal to grow until it swallows up the Trump administration may be making a lot of unwarranted assumptions. A good point.

And I'm sorry to hear Alec Baldwin say that he won't be doing Trump on Saturday Night Live much longer. I wonder who they'll get to play Trump in the future. They're probably looking to see if they have any women who can pull it off.

Leonard Maltin remembers Robert Osborne, who passed away the other day. Sorry to say I never met Mr. Osborne in person, though I certainly watched him on Turner Classic Movies (and elsewhere) and appreciated what he brought to the world of film history.

Our one connection was one night back when he was the Entertainment Reporter on KTTV Channel 11 in Los Angeles. One night on the air, he was talking about the musical My Fair Lady and he slipped and said the original Broadway show was written by Moss Hart. I don't know why but on a whim, I grabbed up the phone, called the KTTV Newsroom and told whoever answered that I wanted to point out a mistake Mr. Osborne had just made. The person said, "One moment" and the next thing I knew, I was speaking with Mr. Osborne.

Startled, I blurted out, "Moss Hart didn't write My Fair Lady. Alan Jay Lerner and Frederic Loewe did. Moss Hart directed it." Osborne said, "Oh, God, of course. How could I have said that?" I felt a little bad because I sounded like one of those people who just lives to find things to complain about. He obviously wasn't uninformed or stupid or anything. He just said the word "written" when he meant to say "directed" — the kind of verbal typo we all make from time to time.

We had a nice three-minute conversation about the show and the movie and I apologized to him if it sounded like I thought he didn't know what I'd told him. Then I watched the rest of the newscast and just before they signed off, he came back on, corrected his wordage and thanked the "loyal viewer" who'd called in to point out his gaffe.

I was impressed that he cared enough to do that…and as I'm writing this, I just remembered another time I corrected him. It was when TCM ran The Sunshine Boys and I wrote about his mistake here. A few days later, I received a nice e-mail from Mr. Osborne saying that he had asked TCM to never run that intro again and to let him tape a new one the next time they aired that film. Again, the mistake is absolutely understandable…and forgiven because he was so conscientious about getting things right. He almost always did and the movie community was blessed to have him.