Friday, June 19, 2015

Top 10 Better New First Names for BLANKET (Michael Jackson's son)

Blanket Jackson changed his name to Bigi, because he didn't want kids to tease him about having a stupid name.

There are so many reasons to tease this kid, no matter what name.

He's also picked a confusing name. Did the kid who stole away half The Beatles catalog try to steal The BeeGees?

Or is Bigi pronounced more like Biggie, as in the old King Leonard cartoon foe, Biggie Rat? He does have an Itchy Brother.

Here are Ten alternatives for the Son of Freakenstein. It's still not too late, Blanket-Bigi.

10. Linus

9. Comforter

8. Yankit

7. Beach Blanket Bingo

6. Dad Beat It To Make Me

5. Guess-My-Gender

4. Realnose

3. Inheritor

2. Tamla

1. Bankit

Sunday, June 7, 2015

What David Letterman Should Do Next

I was feeling sad about David Letterman's retirement. I was reminded, "Unlike Johnny and Jay, he wanted to go."

True. Dave didn't cry during his farewell. He was more than aware that in a few years he'd seriously be out of his depth in talking to brainless starlets and dopey guys with stubble and a new movie.

After all, he was witnessing enough stupidity with the "dangerous" stunts of Bill Murray, ones that were becoming so exceedingly strained and predictable that even Murray seemed to need several belts of booze to bother.

Then there was the supposedly sophisticated, feminist comedian Tina Fey, awkwardly trying broad (yes, intentional term) comedy.

Now in her 40's, flinty of face, thickening in the wrong places, Fey did nobody a favor except goggle-eyed Dave.

Frankly, Dave did better years ago with Drew Barrymore.

How was he supposed to feign delight at someone who doesn't even have Julia Louis-Dreyfus's mild flare for visual humor?

More of this, and Dave could almost be accused of being a senile Fallon, cheering and clapping over any ridiculous and witless celebrity stunt.

So, a bit slowly, I came around to the notion that Dave's time on late night television had come. Yes, he was leaving things to Jimmies and a James...all of them gaga over worthless young TV stars, prone to nasty practical jokes or painfully obvious pre-recorded bits, and willing to play Password or Scrabble regardless of whether anyone else enjoys watching.

He also was figuring that his kid, age 11, could use Dad around the house for as long as possible. And at 68, naps become more frequent.

I should add that I've met the guy, I've been backstage in the green room several times with celeb friends, and I was lucky enough to attend some milestone broadcasts. He's been part of my life for a tremendous chunk of it.

So I don't want to see him disappear like Johnny did. My solution? Now, hear me out...


If you've noticed, Dave became a lot more political in his last few years. He brought on newscasters, authors and politicians to ask serious questions. If he sometimes prefaced these with "I'm just a dumb guy," he still was asking those questions.

He was expressing concern for the world his son Harry would inherit.

And that's why I think he might be right for a Sunday morning interview show that would center less on idiot celebrities, and more on politicians and newsmakers. He's demonstrated in talking to Rudy Giuliani, Mike Bloomberg, Brian Williams, Barack and Michelle Obama and others, that he can ask a tough question and a sincere one.

If Bill Maher can do a largely political show with only a monologue and a "New Rules" segment for real comedy, why can't Dave do one? Monologue, intelligent older guests, and a "Top Ten" list finale?

What's he doing now? Going to Montana? Guffawing over the race car he co-owns? Wandering around lower Manhattan looking like THIS:

After a few more months off, and realizing that boys do NOT like to have their fathers hanging around ALL THE TIME, Dave might just want to get back into the game. Once a week, Sunday morning, on the network that lost "Face the Nation" host Bob Schieffer to retirement? Why not? "Four More Years..." Dave. Retire at Bob's age. "Four more years..."

Unnecessary Censorship in Movie ads and DVD boxes

Whether you laugh at something sophisticated or stupid, the sound is the same.

And now for some things that are completely stupid...



DAILY NEWS Censors a "Fag" Sign?

The Daily News sent out a mixed message about "Freedom of Speech."

In covering the crazed Westboro Baptist Church bullies, they blurred one of their signs.

Is this a "moment in unnecessary censorship?"

First of all, we all know what the word is. It's FAG. It's been used by some gays the same way NIGGER has been used by some blacks — to mock its importance or power.

The article's point is that even racists have rights, and a man was wrong for throwing coffee at these obnoxious idiots. He admitted he was wrong, but that he'd do it again, and most understand his frustration. There's also a question of how much of an "assault" is involved in throwing a pie or warm coffee. In small claims court, you'd pay for the dry cleaning, and that's about it.

If the Westboro Baptist Church can use the word FAG without being arrested, and certainly without fear that an assault would be justified, why is the Daily News literally distorting the photo? When does "Freedom of Speech" become an editorial choice?

The full impact of what the church members do is blunted when a sign is blurred. Isn't that protecting them? Some might not notice the word when it's blurred, and not realize just how vile and stupid these people are.

Another editorial point: what if the marine was gay, and was angry not just at the abuse of the American flag, or the disrespect to the Biden family, but to the gay slur? Would the News have not blurred the sign, to show how shocking it was to this man?

Is it ever a good idea to blur, shade or distort the truth?