I don't know who created this, but I like it...

I don't know who created this, but I like it...

posted at
12:02 AM
Categories: picture of the day

posted at
4:02 PM
Categories: podcasts, television


posted at
4:01 PM
Categories: Final Table, podcasts, poker/vegas
A funny, insightful piece by Will Durst on what the GOP calls "a class war"...When taxes are raised on the rich, that's class warfare, but when subsidies are handed out to giant corporations who siphon jobs offshore so that rich people can have more money, that's Trickle-Down Economics. What Barack should do is rename his efforts to balance the playing field, "Trickle-Up Economics." That would at least confuse them. Although after watching the last couple of debates, confusion does not seem to be in short supply.
Read Durst's entire piece here.
We're not even allowed to call them rich anymore. They're "job creators" now. And yes, jobs are being created. In Mexico. And Vietnam. And China. The American Dream is alive and well, just not here. It's our own damn fault, really. American workers have ruined everything with their irrational demands for safe working conditions and a living wage. Who do we think we are? Stockholders?
Republicans have been as strident as a looped siren in a stainless steel silo in their opposition to a specific Obama proposal called the Buffett Rule, which calls for billionaires like Warren Buffett to pay the same tax rate as their secretaries. The GOP prefers the Jimmy Buffett Rule, which postulates that anybody worried about next month's rent money- start drinking Margaritas until they pass out.
On MSNBC, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski just finished talking with Bill Clinton at his annual Clinton Global Initiative conference. As they went to a commercial break, Mika turned to Joe and asked about the former president, "Has he always been a low talker?" Having apparently never seen a certain episode of "Seinfeld," Clinton injected, "A low talker? What's that?" Mika replied, "It's a person who...well...we have to lean in to hear what you're saying." I guess she forgot her own network's promotional slogan: Lean Forward.
It could have been worse. Scarborough could have been wearing a puffy shirt.
I received a lot of phone calls and e-mails yesterday from people who wanted my opinion after news broke about the US Attorney in Manhattan calling the online poker site Full Tilt Poker a "global ponzi scheme" and filing a civil lawsuit against the owners of the company, including well-known poker pros Howard Lederer and Chris Ferguson.
Dennis Phillips and I spent the first half of our Final Table show discussing all the details of the story at length yesterday (you can listen to it here), with me concluding that Lederer and Ferguson may go down as bigger poker pariahs than Russ Hamilton, the man behind the Ultimate Bet cheating scandal of a few years ago. If the allegations against Lederer, Ferguson, et al are true, then they cheated a lot more people out of a lot more money -- hundreds of millions of dollars -- than Hamilton ever dreamed of, thus rushing past Hamilton and approaching Bernie Madoff on the scumbag scale.
What this means for anyone who still has money locked up on Full Tilt (which they haven't been able to withdraw since the DOJ shut down their US operations on Black Friday, April 15th) is that any hope of recouping those funds is now almost assuredly lost. This entire affair, while far from over, serves as more proof of why online poker needs to be licensed and regulated in the United States. While strict rules don't guarantee people won't get ripped off -- see Bernie Madoff, Enron, the financial industry, etc. -- they do create an environment where safety and security are a priority and, with proper oversight, limit the opportunities for customers' cash to be misused by criminal enterprises or businesses that are simply run incompetently, whether there's an intent to steal or not.
The story also highlights the difference between Full Tilt and PokerStars. While the execs at the former allegedly had a pay-themselves-first policy to the tune of $444 million over four years (!), the latter has kept players' funds segregated and secure so that they could return them to US players after Black Friday, and continue to service players in other parts of the world. That's why, going forward, the DOJ will likely look more favorably on PokerStars than Full Tilt (and Absolute Poker and Ultimate Bet and other sites).
Lederer and Ferguson, along with CEO Ray Bitar and other Full Tilt owners like Rafe Furst, created a new-media business that, if run honorably, would have printed lots of money for them year in and year out. Unfortunately, they let greed get the best of them and cooked their golden goose.
I didn't have any money on Full Tilt, so I'm not directly affected by these allegations, but I worry that none of this is good for poker's overall image. Unfortunately, poker only gets major media attention when something negative like this Full Tilt story breaks, and then it seems as if none of the reporters has ever played a hand online or set foot in a poker room. Thus, their bias is to present our game as something slimy, when in fact the story is about corrupt business practices.
Most of us who play poker are upstanding, normal people who enjoy the challenge of outplaying our opponents at the table. Some play for small amounts, others play for more. Most of us play within our means recreationally, while some have turned it into a profession. I know of a friendly neighborhood game played in someone's basement for $5 each, but I also know of a weekly game that existed in DC when I lived there where the buy-in was $10,000 and the participants included a Supreme Court Justice and several big-shot lawyers.
Regardless of the size of the game or the circumstances, poker players must be conscious of the image we're presenting -- not to each other, but to the general population. I'm not suggesting that all the hoodies and sunglasses be thrown aside in favor of suits and ties, but the way players dress and act (both at the tables and elsewhere) can have a great impact on how the non-poker-playing world views all of us.
We don't play in dingy smoke-filled backrooms anymore, and we shouldn't act like it. We play out in the open in our local casinos, with dozens of cameras and personnel ensuring the integrity of the game. I don't know anywhere else in the world you'd see people leaving a stack of hundreds of dollars worth of chips behind while they go to the bathroom, secure in the knowledge it'll still be there when they get back.
As in any industry, there are people with sad stories related to finance, relationships, jobs, and other problem areas, and unfortunately, they tend to get the spotlight more often than poker success stories. Why? Because most winning poker players don't make a fuss about themselves. It's bad for business to go around bragging about how much you've won or who you beat or why you're the best. It's also bad for business for any poker player to be revealed as a cheater, because it reflects on all of us, just like every baseball slugger was assumed to be using steroids.
Besides, we're usually playing against people we know, who know us and our reputations: this guy's a great player, this guy's a lousy player, this guy's a fish, this guy plays tight unless he's had too many beers, this guy plays too many hands, this guy may be ahead now but he won't have any chips left when he leaves, this guy almost always wins, etc. Yet it's not an exclusive club -- when a visitor comes to town or a first-timer sits down at the table, they're not shunned, but welcomed to the game and treated like everyone else.
So, if you're not a poker player, please don't let the Full Tilt headlines color your view of those of us who play the game legitimately and honestly. Save your frowns for the real culprits, or for the opponent who just cracked your aces.


posted at
9:54 PM
Categories: Final Table, podcasts, poker/vegas
Facebook has lowered the bar on the definition of "friend" to include people who have never met or spoken to each other, but I didn't know it has done the same for the word "fan" until today. While driving around, I saw a sign in front of an apartment complex that read, "Follow us and become our fan on Facebook!"
A fan of an apartment complex? To what end? Are you hoping someday to get an autographed eight-by-ten glossy of the building? Waiting for the superintendent to "like" you?
What kind of status updates do you get from an apartment complex? "I retained my brick facade today. Love the color red."
William Shatner explains why "Star Trek" is better than "Star Wars" -- fewer special effects and more beautiful women (although he'd still run off with Princess Leia). I have no idea who the redhead sitting next to him is...
posted at
12:02 AM
Categories: movies, picture of the day, television
From my Twitter feed...
It's been almost a decade since I went to see an NFL game in person, and although I love the sport, I don't anticipate going back anytime soon. I greatly prefer the experience of watching the games at home, for several reasons:
Every presidential candidate is now, has been, or wants to be employed by the federal government. Yet that doesn't stop most of them from bashing that very institution. Paul Begala argues that they're all wrong, and comes to the government's defense...
Conservatives talk about government as if it were something foreign, alien, or extrinsic when in fact the Constitution says it truthfully and simply: “We the People.” Government is us. It’s capable of true greatness, real nobility, and majestic triumphs. I’d go further: the U.S. federal government is the greatest force for good in human history. Period.More here.
The federal government freed the slaves and defeated Hitler. It built the interstate highway system, won the Cold War, integrated the South, put men on the moon, and killed Osama bin Laden. By the way, it also created the Internet, with Al Gore’s leadership. So there.....
The truth is many of our problems were caused by too little government, regulation, and taxation (at least of the rich). Wall Street was deregulated, and when the casino went bust, taxpayers bailed out the gamblers. Regulators cozied up to oil companies, and 11 working men were killed in the Deepwater Horizon tragedy as BP’s well gushed millions of barrels into the Gulf of Mexico. After 29 miners were killed in the Upper Big Branch Mine disaster in West Virginia, an independent investigation found that the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration "failed its duty as the watchdog for coal miners."
The media have a responsibility here as well. When New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie bashes retired teachers for getting an average pension of about $35,000 a year, why does no one point out that they’re worth it? Or that New Jersey students have the highest AP test scores in the nation? Because that wouldn’t fit the anti-government narrative.
The truth is teachers didn’t cause our recession; firefighters didn’t cause layoffs; nurses and cops didn’t turn a record surplus into a record deficit. Politicians and corporate greedheads did. And yet government remains the villain.
Today is the 224th birthday of the US Constitution, one of the most remarkable documents ever written. As Geoffrey R. Stone points out, those who call for strict interpretation of its original words fail to see the progressive nature of the document...
The Constitution has served as the vehicle through which generations of Americans have made and remade their nation. When one steps back, as one should on Constitution Day, and considers the most profound changes in our society since 1789, it is easy to see that, by any reasonable measure, the Constitution has served in the long run as a progressive document that has enabled us to protect the rights, liberties and well-being of our people.Stone's entire piece is here.
The original Constitution did not even have a Bill of Rights. That was added soon after ratification of the Constitution to ensure that the new national government would not abridge the freedom of speech or prohibit the free exercise of religion; that it would not engage in unreasonable searches and seizures or inflict cruel and unusual punishment; that it would not deprive people of life, liberty or property without due process of law or convict people of crimes without honoring their rights to a jury trial, to the assistance of counsel, and to present their own witnesses and to confront the witnesses against them.
Later, after a bloody Civil War, the American people again amended the Constitution, this time to forbid slavery; to guarantee that no State would deny any person due process of law, the equal protection of the laws, or the privileges or immunities of citizenship; and to grant blacks the right to vote.
Since then, the Constitution has been further amended to authorize the federal income tax so the national government would have sufficient resources to meet the demands of a changing society; to grant women the right to vote; to provide for the popular election of senators; to outlaw the poll tax; and to grant the right to vote to all persons over the age of eighteen.
Almost without exception, our constitutional amendments have been progressive in nature, expanding both individual freedoms and the opportunity for individual Americans to participate more fully in the political and economic life of the nation.
Even apart from the process of amendment, the Constitution has had sufficient flexibility in its often open-ended language to enable government to pursue important social and economic policies that might never have been envisioned by the framers. As understood by the American people, by our elected officials and by our Supreme Court, the Constitution has enabled the national government to enact laws that helped us through the devastation of the Great Depression; prohibited private discrimination on the basis of race, religion, gender, national origin and disability; promoted workplace safety and the environment; and provided a critical safety net for the aged, the infirm and the needy.
All of these laws, and many besides, were opposed by political conservatives who invoked a crabbed view of the Constitution to argue that the national government had no authority to "promote the general Welfare," but in the long run those arguments have never carried the day. If one takes the long view, it is clear that it was the progressive vision of the American Constitution, embraced by citizens, legislators, presidents and judges, that ultimately prevailed.
Jamy Ian Swiss, who helped devise the Million Dollar Challenge tests for so-called psychics last month on the "Beyond Belief" episode of "Primetime Nightline," looks back at whether the show presented skepticism (and the James Randi Educational Foundation) in a good light. Like me, he was mostly happy with the results.
Speaking of Randi, here's an interview with him that includes his recommendations for books by Richard Dawkins, Carl Sagan, Isaac Asimov, and others.
Michele Bachmann has been catching flak for comments she made about vaccines this week, comments which put her into the same qualified-to-lead-America camp as Jenny McCarthy.
Monday night, Bachmann went after Rick Perry for an executive order he signed in 2007 mandating that girls entering sixth grade be vaccinated against cervical cancer. Specifically, the vaccine fights HPV, human papillomavirus, which kills thousands of American women, forces tens of thousands more to have surgery, or can cause genital warts.
Bachmann attacked Perry because the company that first made the HPV vaccine, Merck, donated money to his gubernatorial campaign, somewhere in the neighborhood of $30,000. While there are valid points to be made about political campaigns being financed by corporations that want a quid pro quo, that's the less important part of this controversy.
Perry, who is so wrong on other science issues (evolution!), was absolutely right to sign that order. Unfortunately, the Texas legislature blocked Perry's order from going into effect. Some of the opposition was because HPV is transmitted through sexual contact, and it's hard to think of sixth graders having sex, but the vaccine doesn't encourage 12-year-olds to have sex, it protects them when they do get around to that physical act -- an inevitability even if their parents are Republicans. At the debate, Bachmann combined the kid card with a typical Tea Party anti-government line: "To have innocent little 12-year-old girls be forced to have a government injection, is just flat out wrong."
Government injection. She makes it sound like the National Guard would round up pubescent girls, march them off to a state agency, and forcibly vaccinate them against their wills. The fact is, these injections are administered by the girls' pediatricians, just like the vaccines for mumps, measles, rubella, diptheria, tetanus, pertussis, hepatitis B, chicken pox, and polio -- all of which are already required by Texas law for children attending school!
Imagine the backlash if Bachmann had attacked Perry over the vaccines for polio or measles. Even Tea Partiers would toss her off the debate stage.
But that's still not the worst part. That came Tuesday morning, when Bachmann was asked about her remarks on the "Today" show by Matt Lauer, and she reinforced her anti-vaccine argument by saying that a woman had come up to her in tears after the debate in Tampa and told her "that her little daughter took that vaccine, that injection, and she suffered from mental retardation thereafter. It can have very dangerous side effects. This is the very real concern and people have to draw their own conclusions."
NO. People don't have to draw their own conclusions about science, especially in a country that's bordering on scientifically illiterate. The HPV vaccine does NOT cause mental retardation, which is a developmental disorder. There is no evidence of a link. Moreover, the HPV vaccine has been administered 35,000,000 times since it was approved five years ago and proven very effective, with an excellent safety record, according to the president of the American Association of Pediatrics, and its use is recommended by the Centers For Disease Control for the prevention of most types of cervical cancer.
Bachmann defended her mental retardation remarks later Tuesday by saying, "I’m not a doctor, I’m not a scientist, I’m not a physician. All I was doing is reporting what this woman told me last night at the debate." She's obviously not a scientist, but she is a United States Congresswoman (to the everlasting shame of Minnesotans), and when she say things like that out loud, many people who don't know better will believe her. Repeating this kind of nonsense does not make it true, but it can cost lives. We already have too many people who refuse to allow their children to be vaccinated against any disease because they fell for the long-debunked garbage linking vaccines to autism.
Bachmann must apologize for spreading misinformation, and from now on leave the rumor-spreading to TMZ and the science to the CDC.
As Anderson Cooper pointed out last night on CNN, this is just the latest in a serious of blatant lies Bachmann has been telling, just to score political points...
posted at
10:12 AM
Categories: columns, picture of the day, politics, skepticism

posted at
2:48 PM
Categories: podcasts, skepticism

posted at
12:02 AM
Categories: where's the show?


posted at
10:40 PM
Categories: Final Table, podcasts, poker/vegas
Welcome to 9/13/11, which "The Daily Show" refers to as the 10th anniversary of "the day Americans forgot the lessons of the day they had sworn they would always remember"...
posted at
12:00 AM
Categories: picture of the day, politics, war/terrorism

posted at
10:01 AM
Categories: picture of the day
For the last two weeks, my wife and I have been watching the US Open coverage (as we do all grand slam tennis tournaments), which will conclude this afternoon with Rafael Nadal and Novak Djokovic competing for the men's championship. Regardless of who wins, it will be a sad day for tennis -- but it has nothing to do with the players. Rather, it has to do with a broadcaster.
This will be the final tennis match with Dick Enberg as the lead announcer. He's giving up those responsibilities because he's too busy as play-by-play man for the San Diego Padres, and doesn't want to miss six weeks of baseball season (two weeks each for the French Open, Wimbledon, and the US Open).
Enberg is a true sportscasting legend. No one has been so great for so long at calling so many different sporting events. After all these years in the booth, Enberg has earned the right to choose his assignments, but his voice will be missed on future tennis broadcasts.
If you missed my conversation with Enberg in 2005 about his book "Oh, My!" you can listen to it here.
Michael Moore's new book, "Here Comes Trouble," will be published next week. It's full of two dozen stories from his life, one of which has been excerpted in the British newspaper The Guardian. It's about the death threats that followed Moore's anti-Bush statements on the night he won the Oscar for "Bowling for Columbine" and the Navy Seals he had to hire to protect him as he made "Fahrenheit 9/11."
When we got back to our home in northern Michigan, the local beautification committee had dumped three truckloads of horse manure waist-high in our driveway so that we wouldn't be able to enter our property – a property which, by the way, was freshly decorated with a dozen or so signs nailed to our trees: GET OUT! MOVE TO CUBA! COMMIE SCUM! TRAITOR! LEAVE NOW OR ELSE!Read the entire piece here.
I had no intention of leaving.
The hate mail after the Oscar speech was so voluminous, it almost seemed as if Hallmark had opened a new division where greeting card writers were assigned the task of penning odes to my passing. ("For a Special Motherfucker …" "Get Well Soon from Your Mysterious Car Accident!" "Here's to a Happy Stroke!")
The phone calls to my house were actually creepier. It's a whole different fright machine when a human voice is attached to the madness and you think: "This person literally risked arrest to say this over a phone line!" You had to admire the balls – or insanity – of that.
But the worst moments were when people came on to our property. These individuals would just walk down the driveway, always looking like rejects from the cast of Night of the Living Dead, never moving very fast, but always advancing with singleminded purposefulness. Few were actual haters; most were just crazy. We kept the sheriff's deputies busy until they finally suggested we might want to get our own security, or perhaps our own police force. Which we did.
We met with the head of the top security agency in the country, an elite outfit that did not hire ex-cops, nor any "tough guys" or bouncer-types. They preferred to use only Navy Seals and other ex–Special Forces. Guys who had a cool head and who could take you out with a piece of dental floss in a matter of nanoseconds. By the end of the year, due to the alarming increase of threats and attempts on me, I had nine ex-Seals surrounding me, round-the-clock.
posted at
4:58 AM
Categories: movies, politics, war/terrorism


Ever stay in a hotel room with a safe in the closet so you can protect your valuables with a pass-code that you create and no one else can figure out? Before you trust the techonology, you should know about the default digits that allow anyone to open your safe without your pass-code...
posted at
12:00 AM
Categories: picture of the day
From my Twitter feed...
The GOP candidates continue to attack Obama on unemployment, as if there's a magic wand any President can wave that would create a national wave of private-sector hiring in the short-term. It's the platform they have to shoot from as long as jobs are such a huge issue.
So here's a question I'd like to see them asked at the next debate: "If you become President and the national unemployment rate isn't reduced substantially in your first three years in office, will you step down at the end of your first term without running for re-election?"
None of them will answer it, instead veering off into talking points about how badly Obama has handled the economy, conveniently ignoring how we got here (thanks again, Wall Street fat cats and financial industry money-grubbers!). Of course, it's possible that by the time 2016 rolls around, the labor situation in the US could improve markedly. If it's on their watch, they'll take credit. If Obama's still in office, they'll claim he had nothing to do with it (just as they continue to deny Clinton's role in the economic boom during his presidency).
Republicans have fostered an image of being thrifty with your tax dollars while positioning Democrats as the ones who tax and spend and expand government. Democrats, for some reason, haven't defended their record. The truth is that the five most recent Democratic Presidents (Clinton, Carter, Johnson, Kennedy, and Truman) all reduced national debt as a share of GDP, while our public debt increased under the last four Republican Presidents (Bush 43, Bush 41, Reagan, and Ford), according to economist Mike Kimel.
There's an economic cycle at work here that does have a correlation to who's sitting in the Oval Office. When Ronald Reagan was President, he not only raised taxes 11 times (!), but the deficit exploded. That left his successor, George HW Bush, with a bloated budget he could not get under control, forcing him to finally break his campaign promise and raise taxes, too, which cost him his re-election. Then a Democrat, Bill Clinton (who won thanks to James Carville's "It's The Economy, Stupid!" campaign theme) came into office, balanced the budget, and built up a surplus for the federal government. He was followed by a Republican, George W. Bush, who cut taxes (which did not create more jobs), got us into two unfunded wars and built up an even bigger deficit, all of which he then left to his successor, Barack Obama.
Were the economic problems of 1988-1992 the fault of Bush 41, who 8 years earlier had warned against Reagan "voodoo economics"? Not really, but he bore the brunt of America's anger over a condition he did not create, and did not win re-election.
Could this scenario repeat in 2012? Can Obama escape this cycle of blame for a mess he inherited? Does the GOP have a candidate who can stay sane long enough to work Carville's theme against Obama? Will the Democrats even attempt to take back the fiscally-responsible image?
Read my lips -- it's too early to tell.

In March, 2010, the NY Public Library hosted a tribute to George Carlin two years after his death. The event coincided with the publication of the last thing Carlin wrote, a semi-autobiography with Tony Hendra called "Last Words." One of the people who spoke that night was Louis CK, who remembered how Carlin had inspired him to develop new material and a whole new outlook on comedy...
posted at
12:00 AM
Categories: picture of the day


posted at
11:12 PM
Categories: Final Table, podcasts, poker/vegas
This is one of the most important political pieces I have read in a very long time.
It's by Mike Lofgren, who spent 28 years as a Republican staff member on Capitol Hill, explaining why he left that job -- and the GOP, which he says is "becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult."
He goes into specific detail about what's wrong with the modern-day Republican party, from doing everything to help the rich and soak the rest of us to the way their religious zealotry distracts low-information voters to how the crazies have taken over the party. He details the right's success in "concocting an entirely artificial fiscal crisis," then using that crisis to get what they wanted by holding the domestic and global economies hostage.
Moreover, he reveals the GOP's strategy of purposefully creating dissatisfaction with government to create a populace more easily manipulated:
A couple of years ago, a Republican committee staff director told me candidly (and proudly) what the method was to all this obstruction and disruption. Should Republicans succeed in obstructing the Senate from doing its job, it would further lower Congress's generic favorability rating among the American people. By sabotaging the reputation of an institution of government, the party that is programmatically against government would come out the relative winner.Lofgren doesn't spare the Democrats (he hasn't joined that party), who have lost the battle by not understanding how to use language, not appealing to the weakened middle class, and not fighting loudly and strongly enough for the core issues of our time. Why? Because while Republicans use fear to stimulate their base, Democrats are filled with fear at being painted with a negative GOP brush.
A deeply cynical tactic, to be sure, but a psychologically insightful one that plays on the weaknesses both of the voting public and the news media. There are tens of millions of low-information voters who hardly know which party controls which branch of government, let alone which party is pursuing a particular legislative tactic. These voters' confusion over who did what allows them to form the conclusion that "they are all crooks," and that "government is no good," further leading them to think, "a plague on both your houses" and "the parties are like two kids in a school yard." This ill-informed public cynicism, in its turn, further intensifies the long-term decline in public trust in government that has been taking place since the early 1960s -- a distrust that has been stoked by Republican rhetoric at every turn ("Government is the problem," declared Ronald Reagan in 1980).
The media are also complicit in this phenomenon. Ever since the bifurcation of electronic media into a more or less respectable "hard news" segment and a rabidly ideological talk radio and cable TV political propaganda arm, the "respectable" media have been terrified of any criticism for perceived bias. Hence, they hew to the practice of false evenhandedness. Paul Krugman has skewered this tactic as being the "centrist cop-out." "I joked long ago," he says, "that if one party declared that the earth was flat, the headlines would read 'Views Differ on Shape of Planet.'"
Democrats ceded the field. Above all, they do not understand language. Their initiatives are posed in impenetrable policy-speak: the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The what? -- can anyone even remember it? No wonder the pejorative "Obamacare" won out. Contrast that with the Republicans' Patriot Act. You're a patriot, aren't you? Does anyone at the GED level have a clue what a Stimulus Bill is supposed to be? Why didn't the White House call it the Jobs Bill and keep pounding on that theme?It's rare to hear this kind of candor from someone who operated within the framework of a political machine, an insider who's seen it all from Capitol Hill. Every Democrat, from President Obama on down, should read Lofgren's piece, recognize what's going on and, rather than try to mollify and compromise opponents who will not give an inch, present Americans with a real choice-- a strong voice that stands for them.
You know that Social Security and Medicare are in jeopardy when even Democrats refer to them as entitlements. "Entitlement" has a negative sound in colloquial English: somebody who is "entitled" selfishly claims something he doesn't really deserve. Why not call them "earned benefits," which is what they are because we all contribute payroll taxes to fund them? That would never occur to the Democrats. Republicans don't make that mistake; they are relentlessly on message: it is never the "estate tax," it is the "death tax." Heaven forbid that the Walton family should give up one penny of its $86-billion fortune. All of that lucre is necessary to ensure that unions be kept out of Wal-Mart, that women employees not be promoted and that politicians be kept on a short leash.
There are episodes of "Cheers" airing 10 times today across the various channels that come into my TV (including Reelz Channel, which is supposedly about movies but has to fill much of its programming day with infomercials and episodes of "Becker," "Ally McBeal," and "Third Rock From The Sun" -- the only thing worth watching on Reelz is Leonard Maltin's weekly movie review show). I don't know of any other show that airs that often every weekday across so many channels, but then most shows didn't last 11 years, as "Cheers" did.
Michael Schur, who was a writer for "The Office" and co-creator of "Parks and Recreation," thinks "Cheers" is the greatest sitcom of all-time, and makes a pretty good case in this piece.

posted at
4:00 AM
Categories: where's the show?

posted at
9:23 AM
Categories: picture of the day
From my Twitter feed...

posted at
4:00 AM
Categories: where's the show?

My new syndicated show
AMERICA WEEKEND
If you're looking for archives of my
you'll find all the podcasts here