Archive for January, 2010

Massachusetts

Tuesday, January 19th, 2010

I guess I should mention that I jotted this down earlier today, when the tea leaves showed the outcome.

In a better world, I should not care one whitt that the electorate in the state of Massachusetts decided to vote in a Republican, even with the portence of a bad November for the Democratic Party.  A margin of victory came from a slice of Democrats who wanted to punt for a better Democratic candidate in four years, even with the general anger of the populace.   But to spell out the Senate as it now stands, and why in a better world I should not be much bothered by this election.:

57 Democrats
41 Republicans
1 Socialist
1 Lieberman

The problem may be in the fact that that 57 number contains a good deal of “LINO”s.  Or it may be that the magic number of 60 is set in stone in part because the two parties are essentially Fund Raising Contraption Schemes, and thus at the root the number has to just remain.

So, he won because he drives a truck, posed shirtless in Cosmopolitan, and had the backing from the Mailman from Cheers.  She lost because she can’t even be bothered to spell her state correctly, stated how much she hated the very idea of shaking people’s hands, and because she didn’t really know who Curt Schilling was.

In fairness to her on that last point, I thought Curt Schilling played for the Diamondbacks.  (I am of the firm belief that the best thing that happened to professional sports is the rise of “Fantasy Sports”.  It saves a whole slice of sports fans from the weird sports fan act of  rooting for Laundary.  Damned it, I’m an Elitist… except when I’m a populist.)

I am a believer that in Washington, a bad Democrat is better than a good Republican — and Coakley was one of three varieties of bad Democrat.  In the Senate, certainly.  At the state level, and in this case maybe in the House I would say “Screw it all” and suggest a Brown vote in order.  The theory of the Bad Democrat / Good Republican is spelled out in the rationalizations for his voting for Romney’s Health Care in Massachussets while blunting pretty much the same thing on the national level with Obama.  I would like to think some kind of Republican irreconcible might form to offset the dynamic that exists with Bayh and company in the Democrats.  But such a thing isn’t in the forecast.  So the political hack games commence.  There is a reason I’ve shelved this race in my political musings — I’ll spit out another post in a day or two on the tedious reactions and analyses.

Late Night Wars II, number four

Monday, January 18th, 2010

Once upon a time, Johnny Carson presented the marriage of Novelty Singer Tiny Tim and … I don’t know the name of the woman he married.  This received enormous ratings, and for a long time was amongst the most viewed television programs in History.

I can’t say I liked Johnny Carson.  I do remember the first time I saw him, or the first time it registered that I saw Johnny Carson.  I was fascinated by the opening montage introduction.  I found Ed McMohn annoying.  I was left with no opinion of Karmac.  I haven’t the foggiest idea why I was up way past my bedtime — it was surely Summer time, perhaps the family had rented a movie.  Years later, I rented several “Best Of” tapes for the decvades.  I wanted to like Johnny Carson.  I really didn’t.

Reportedly there were years when NBC was down in the dumpster, and Carson’s massive ratings share carried the network, meaning the difference between profits and losses.  That was then, this is now.  Such a thing won’t happen again.  The NBC Executive’s line about “the complete failure of Conan O’brien” is, in that light, hilarious.  Even with his mediocre ratings, the network affiliates wouldn’t say “boo” about anything other than the situation in prime time, and the lead in to their local news broadcasts.  A more acute example of the situation is shown in that for two or three years, Conan O’brien survived off of the flimsiest and briefest of contract extensions, ready to oust at any minute and go the way of Chevy Chase, but an inertia of why anyone really cares about the ratings in late night fringe kept him through.

The story is well worn.  Up and coming comedians were talent scouted off of the LA Comedy Circuit and brought in for their shot at the Big Time on Johnny Carson, basically having one shot.  So it is there that Jay Leno bombed.  Which would have been the end of his rise to the Big Time, except for the Big Fan he had in the name of David Letterman, who made him a frequent guest on his show.
And the rest of the story is equally well worn.  Letterman would have been Carson’s choice for a replacement, and indeed, his two post-retirement appearances were on Letterman.  But, NBC made the correct call — which was born out after the Hugh Grant Hooker Apology Tour and Promotion of whatever Romantic Comedy he was pushing and that joke about the size of the movie’s promotional budget made by all of the late night hosts.  Curiously, you have to say in the end NBC had its first dibs, and CBS picked up the other desirable host.

Rationalization number N: the spokesperson for Conan O’brien referencing the Hugh Grant interview in proferring the way a Big Event can spur a permanent ratings jump — this in reference to Conan’s surge in the ratings.  Note briefly that he finally beat Letterman on Friday, and that Friday was once Dav’e best night, but became his Worst Night when he started taping those shows on Monday.  Nonetheless, I suspect Conan has Letterman beat for the duration of his Tonight Show stay — (even though, um, schedules are moot for me and anyone who watches television on the computer screen.)  This is a double edged sword — I suspect Conan may just have solidified and strengthened a large part of his core audience, but who knows what part of this is ephemeral?  Sure, watching Conan is now an example of sticking the middle finger out to “The Man”, “the man” being Jay Leno.  NBC made a weird decision in 2004 in giving Conan the Tonight Show, and thus Jay Leno the boot.  Things worked out such that their great fear of Conan O’brien bolting has been realized,m with the further prospectus that Conan’s name has been enlarged due to this controversy.

Odd items of familiarity.  Anyone remember the old “Intellectual Property of NBC” items?

Well, I think some of these things have been discarded already.  I don’t even really know that that NBC Executive who says his advice to Conan on broadening his audience really even had to tell him to put aside “The Masturbating Bear”, though it’s good to know that NBC will have him in storage for later use.  At stake in the contracts, apparently, is “Triumph the Insult Comedy Dog”, who may have ownership origins with the Robert Smigel Production company and thus might just be saved.  Can “In the Year 3000” be changed to “In the Year 3333” or something, ala the Letterman Experience with Larry Bud Melmohn Calvert DeForest?  I remember one thing, in the Letterman Experience, where he told “Hey!  I did not Invent itemizing lists of ten!”  Somehow Stupid Pet Tricks went on without a hitch, though I do know some things Letterman waited for NBC Inaction of a few years to unveal again (though for the life of me, I can’t think of them off the top of my head.)

I have a thought of clever stunt programming.  If Letterman really wanted to beat Leno in the ratings upon Leno’s return, he’d have on his guest that night… Conan.  That’s not going to happen, of course.

Sometime in the future, time slots will be meaningless.  I suppose they probably already are for high end cable programming, ala “Mad Men”.  Even the Mass Lowest Common Denominator programming of “American Idol” has this weird effect where I know through a form of pop cultural osmosis the “Pants on the Ground” song.  A special note about that program, it is the show which carries Fox to its number one slot.  The Conan spokespeople are already throwing out in their war of words that “Fox” is the “Number one Network”, as against NBC the “Number Four Network”.  Simon Cowell, the heart and soul of American Idol I would say, is leaving, and I suspect that this presages the end of the program’s Cultural Dominance.  Time churn about.

ready to take on Pelosi, Frank, and the guy who represents the Houston district NASA is headquartered

Sunday, January 17th, 2010

Three candidates for the Congress coming out of the Lyndon Larouche Youth Movement.  And I guess we have the question, What would the org do without youtube?  Interesting feedback, seemingly all coming from within Basement Team headquarters.

thbyrnes (2 days ago)  Rachael is attractive, but she is way too stiff at this point.
A rule in Politics:  Everybody is an Elitist except when they are Populist, and vice versa.
Idiots vote (literally, I live in the 4th Dist), she needs to be more likable at their level… they’re never going to understand anything beyond a sound-bite. That is how bail-out Barney got the job, he gets that.
And one word of advice.
Loose the talk about treason and about higher moral issues (at least broad audiences)… stick with the bail-out Barney shtick and hammer the economy and make LaRouche’s ideas her own… (not his) that’s her ticket.
Don’t mention Larouche?  What’s the point of a Larouche ticket unless you keep repeating Larouche’s name over and over again, such as the comments section with this guy.

larouche
larouche …
larouche
larouche
larouche
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
Reid is scum scum
Comment by VoIPpoetry — January 16, 2010 @ 12:13 am

Instant credibility!
……………………………………………………..
MTL911Truth (2 days ago)
It’s great to see LaRouche candidates running for Congress but LaRouche himself should be running for Congress as well. He isn’t going to be President now, and what a great legislator he would make. He would undoubtedly be the greatest mind on the Hill. Please Mr. LaRouche, run for Congress! We need your ideas in there.
Yes.  Represent the various generations.  Three twenty-something year olds to lower the median age, and just to off-set it back to its current marker as Oldest Congress, mr. 8 time presidential candidate.
………………………..
McWalker25 (2 days ago) Yay, Humanity and LaRouche FTW!!
……………………………………..
Regarding Mr. “If I chant his name several times”,
 
@VoIPpoetry, I can’t make heads or tails of where you are coming from. Are you for LaRouche? Are you against him? If so, why or why not?
Clearly, you think Harry Reid is “scum”, but, again, why do you think so?
Comment by classic14rider — January 16, 2010 @ 12:13 am

Pro LaRouche.
…

Pro LaRouche.
Harry Reid was the dumbest lawyer in his entire class.
Harry Reid is corrupt and has been caught in dirty land deals with his friends.
Harry Reid slipped in an “in Perpetuity” cluase on page 1020 of the Health care bill.
This means congress can NEVER overrule it.
This is far worse than Hilter or the NAZIs.
2/3 of people oppose this crooked healthcare just like they did the bailouts and NAFTA.
This is NOT representation by politicians anymore.
Comment by VoIPpoetry — January 16, 2010 @ 12:13 am

Worse than the …
Worse than the Nazis? Get a life.
Comment by JBeatty17 — January 16, 2010 @ 12:13 am

Do you have …
Do you have anything of substance to say?
Not even Hitler had “in perpetuity” clauses on his useless eaters program.
You really are out to lunch. Maybe you outta check out some football or something.
Go to LaRouche’s site and read if you are literate. Any objective reader will conclude that Harry Reid is totally corrupt and must be removed prior to the elections.
Comment by VoIPpoetry — January 16, 2010 @ 12:13 am

 I didn’t get very far in watching the press conference.  I saw Harley Schlanger, of the “Larouche Foundation” (???), and my computer sputtered out after a couple of minutes of the great Hope to Defeat Nancy Pelosi.   But I guess the message is always the same:

Conservative protesters achieved their goal of attracting attention to their cause in Conroe Wednesday but drew criticism for their tactic of depicting President Obama as Hitler.
“We’re here to let people know they have a choice between a Hitler or a Roosevelt,” said LaRouche organizer Craig Holtzclaw, referring to Franklin Delano Roosevelt. “We are advocating for a peaceful repudiation of his policies that are bankrupting this country.”

… with that annoying reference to “conservative protesters”.  Just as well, the comments section show everyone skipping past the topic of the Post Office Warrior Team — because there’s not a whole lot worth saying — and heading over to the more significant topic of Sarah Palin.

One odd comment from the Larouche name chanter:
Maybe you outta check out some football or something.
Wait.  Is this guy reading xlcer’s posts at factnet?  The one that referenced the Eagles losing?
Never time for such frivulous bourgeoise pursuits that get in the way of the creating the new Renaissance.  I barely care, but I care just a tad nonetheless.  My prediction a few weeks ago was that the Superbowl would end up the Chargers and the Saints.  For all I know, by the time I post this half of that equation will be scuttled.

If we want to look around for other pieces of Entertainment news for a few minutes of diversion– the “something” in the phrase “check out some football or something”, I am fascinated by the Late Night Television scuttle between the various late night talk show personalities. It is  hard to take seriously, but has inspired these at-times complacent comics to unload some hilarity. 

Here’s this popular Hitler Internet mememade to use from a Conan O’brien fan.
Now, if you look up “Obama” and “Hitler” on youtube, you will find plenty of variations of the theme. (The Republican Party got into a minor kerfufle when one of them was linked to a sanctioned GOP twitter feed.)  I’m not sure why the Larouche Youth Basement Team hasn’t stuck one up themselves.  Maybe it’d be too easily lost in the shuffle, or maybe we’re now stuck moving forward to the three congressional campaigns.

Are the candidates going to be manning the card-table shrines, and if so will their faces be placed on the signage, this for instance?  Or are we just going to see Pelosi and Frank with a Hitler mustache?

Some more things to consider for in these campaigns.

Congressman Ron Paul today endorsed John Dennis in his Republican bid for United States Congress. Mr. Dennis, a successful entrepreneur and longtime liberty-minded GOP activist, is Some more rtunning to unseat Nancy Pelosi in California’s 8th district.  […]
Congressman Paul‘s endorsement comes through his Liberty PAC, a Republican leadership PAC committed to supporting Liberty minded candidates across the country.
Said Liberty PAC director Jesse Benton, “John Dennis is a terrific candidate who is going to ask tough questions like: ‘Why is Nancy Pelosi running up crushing budget deficits?’, “Why has she allowed President Obama to expand the war in Afghanistan?’, and, ‘Why has Nancy Pelosi refused to support transparency and accountability at the Federal Reserve.’ The constituents of California’s 8th district deserve answers to these questions. John Dennis will hold her accountable.”

I don’t really think that John Dennis has much of interest in really even a percent watch — when was the last Libertarian Party candidate who did, and this John Dennis campaign strikes me in that same basic pattern.  But, if you are trying to explode a vote total into the twenty percentile, in Nancy Pelosi’s district, there are issues to hammer where he is “so right, he meets the left” — foreign policy, generalized discontent over party politics and all that, damned them Wall Street Bailouts.
Still, it looks from afar that Mr. Dennis has a clear path to the General election — I imagine the seven percent or thereabouts of Republicans in the district grasp toward some of these Libertarian hot-bed issues, and an aura of anti-authoritarianism in there.

Meanwhile, are the Larouchies deployed in Massachusetts right now, manning those card tables?  If not, why aren’t they?  There’s a major special Senate election between two candidates I wouldn’t much want to see in the Senate.  It’s an an embarrassment for the Democrats, even if, the best case scenario for that Donkey Party prevails and Coakey wins by like eight percentage points.  Surely plopping down there can be presented to everyone as a successful interaction of the “Mass Strike” — seen on display when everyone cheered the Great Escorting Out at the Harry Reid Town Hall Meeting.  Or is the fact that it’s MLK Day getting in the way?
Or is this too other-directed at this late date?
I park this link here, expecting myself to return to it later.  (Not as interesting is this page.  I see dominickseid has found himself a new Lair.)

Late Night Wars 2, 3

Friday, January 15th, 2010

To tell you the truth, David Letterman misfired and “jumped the shark” (is that one of those expressions we’ve decided to leave to the last decade?)  with this item here. There is one thing that bothers me, maybe two, which seem to justify the (much self-interested) comments from NBC executive about “Professional Jealousy.”

That phrase “Mister Middle America”.

Maybe I should go for the idea that overdoing this matter is better, more entertaining, than underdoing it, and accept it as the lot for a reinvigorated and feisty Letterman.  But It strikes me as akin to Dave sarcastically chirping in a Jay Leno voice, “Mister Middle America, ooh, I’m Mister Middle America, Jay Leno” through the past two decades.

Interesting to note, too, the phrase “America is Standing Up For Jay.”  Dave sure has both a long and odd memory here.  This was the ad campaign Jay Leno ran when Dave started his CBS show — at a time when you can say the situation didn’t look all too well for Leno.

This thing is interesting.  You know, the belief that Jay is blowing this up may well be a principled stand, but we also that self-interest with the fact that Letterman loses to Jay in the ratings and beats Conan.

I also find Jimmy Kimmel’s Leno appearance a bit off-putting at one particular point.  “Conan and I have kids; you have cars.”  In a four way race, Kimmel is that odd man out.

The jarring thing is that in the end, Jay Leno will return to his Tonight Show host and go back to being the ratings winner.  The phrase “Lowest Common Denominator” is a compliment — commercially desirable tobe liked by the largest swarth of the public.  We may well just take some satisfaction in the curious schaudenfruede that that network is still a fourth placer.  And that Jay will lose viewers in some spots in the demographic pool.  The curious thing is the puzzle over viewing habits — they’re, um, in this day and age, not competitors — are they?

clarifying statement

Friday, January 15th, 2010

To clarify:

On today’s The 700 Club, during a segment about the devastation, suffering and humanitarian effort that is needed in Haiti, Dr. Robertson also spoke about Haiti’s history. His comments were based on the widely-discussed 1791 slave rebellion led by Boukman Dutty at Bois Caiman, where the slaves allegedly made a famous pact with the devil in exchange for victory over the French. This history, combined with the horrible state of the country, has led countless scholars and religious figures over the centuries to believe the country is cursed. Dr. Robertson never stated that the earthquake was God’s wrath. If you watch the entire video segment, Dr. Robertson’s compassion for the people of Haiti is clear. He called for prayer for them. His humanitarian arm has been working to help thousands of people in Haiti over the last year, and they are currently launching a major relief and recovery effort to help the victims of this disaster. They have sent a shipment of millions of dollars worth of medications that is now in Haiti, and their disaster team leaders are expected to arrive tomorrow and begin operations to ease the suffering.

Countless scholars?
Are these the respected professors from such institutes of higher learning as Liberty University, Bob Jones University, and Oral Roberts University?  Discussed, perhaps, in a panel discussion?

Also, it is oh so important to know that Robertson never said God did it.  Satan did it.  Because they turned from God over to Satan.  There’s a difference.

Late Night Wars part two, again.

Thursday, January 14th, 2010

You know…

… Network Television beats Cable television in the ratings.

This is relevant information, because cable “revolutionized” television, oh, three decades ago.  And today, we have this interesting little item explaining the problem with Jay Leno. There is this post-fact rationalizing that took place, to Time Magazine.  “The most watched television programming at 10 is TIVO!”

Of course, it is news when cable television beats network television, as happened when F/X beat… whatever the heck NBC is airing at 10.

The basic problems look like this.  When Conan O’brien took over The Tonight Show, the average age of the audience fell by ten years.  Maureen Dowd’s thesis of breaking up the standard television habits works all right and well, I suppose, except even that Time Magazine found it hard and  “ironic” to say Jay Leno was “The Future of Television”.

If you’re like me, your viewing habits of Conan O’brien and David Letterman consist of a couple of days a week, skimming through their program on the Internet.  And if you’re like me, you actively watch no Leno.  At the end of the decade, and the end of the next decade, the viewing habits described by Dowd will be completely Kaput.  Don’t ask me the monetizing a network will figure out.   Given the demographics,  it is just absurd to think that Jay Leno would be a hinge on that television revolution, as he apparently proved to be in the Cable TV revolution of Cable Programming beating Network Programming.  This is also the problem with the “I’m with Coco” campaign — quick question to anyone throwing up their Conan O’brien image on their websites: do you watch that program on your teevee set? (Likewise) in the meantime, it looks like NBC is playing “Hardball”, and the method of getting Conan back to television after the end of next week — and from the television network content provider onto my computer screen — will be a long and tourturous one.

And, Letterman shows, it is fashionable to knock on Jay Leno.

Pat Robertson: 7 degreees of separation to nothing in particular.

Thursday, January 14th, 2010

Major natural disaster.  Unfathomable destruction.  Loss of human life, major dislocation.  And, cuing in five, four, three, two… !!!

“Something happened a long time ago in Haiti, and people might not want to talk about it.   “They were under the heel of the French … and they got together and swore a pact to the devil. They said, ‘We will serve you if you’ll get us free from the French.’

True story.  And the devil said, ‘OK, it’s a deal.’ Ever since, they have been cursed by one thing after another.”

No.  Really.  TRUE STORY!!! Wait.  Who the heck is that black woman, alongside Pat Robertson, playing the same part Pat Robertson did with “I concure” in that Robertson / Falwell 9/11 bit — in this case agreeing that the Hatians made a pact with Satan when they pulled a Slave Revolt?

Based on recent racial awkwardness by major politicians, I’ve been ruminating a tad — and in a bit of a meandering manner.  Follow me on this one, if you will.

Anyone who has seen/read/heard an interview or two with the author of The Family will know (if they hadn’t already) that Pat Robertson’s father was a Senator — the Junior Senator of Virginia, or more properly a loyal patron to Harry Byrd’s Machine (and — well too, member of the “C-Street” Family).  Harry Byrd was the Virginia arch-conservative who tendered to the slenderest government and tax base, and slashed the voting roll to a manageable ten percent or thereabouts — for a manageable three statewide election positions.  And, of course, he authored the “Southern Manifesto”.  He last voted a Democrat in the White House in 1932.  He himself was, in 1956 and 1960, a floating Southern electoral candidate for plotters scheming to throw the presidential election to the Congress to enact policies against Civil Rights.  It’s the same theory of basis for the Strom Thurmond race of 1948 and the George Wallace race of 1968.  And it had a particular possibility of occurring in the close 1960 race — some say, had it not been for ghost votes in Daley’s Illinois and Johnson’s Texas.

Curious to note, the Byrd electors, in the dashes to create the controversy after the election, and not fully aware of the Constitutional process that would saddle them with a vice president Lodge or Johnson — batted around the name “Goldwater” to roll with Byrd.

A recent Republican Party “Historic Republicans” page featured a bizarre roll call of 19th century Abolitionists and Women’s Suffragists.  And Jackie Robinson.  By any right, Goldwater would figure into an actually cognent page, indeed the man is honorable enough a figure.  But somehow the modus operandi for the page — assert a tradition of inclusion even if you have to go back two centuries — forebade Goldwater (even as Reagan asserted enough of a presence that he couldn’t possibly be ignored).  The page fell under the weight of its own absurdity, naturally, and it takes a minute to google up a Jackie Robinson quote comparing the 1964 Republican Party Convention to a Klan Rally.

Interesting to note, the first choice for some key Goldwater backers in fishing about for presidential candidates to reverse the marching tide of Socialism and Integration backed to the New Deal policies of Roosevelt (if then) was Orval Faubus — Arkansas Governor who rallied the public against the integration of the Little Rock high school as per the Brown v Board of Education ruling.*  Also notable, in 1964, Strom Thurmond switched parties without much of a hitch, standing side by side with Barry Goldwater.  At that time, negotiations were taking place for George Wallace to switch parties.  He did not, in part not wanting to play second fiddle to Strom Thurmond — but for a matter of timing, another item of electoral realignment might have fallen into place.  Barry Goldwater would not have been side by side at a Wallace party-switch press conference — he hated the man, and found him ideological compatible.

I guess this floats George Wallace down into the tradition of Benjamin Tillman, and separates a way from Strom Thurmond.  The authors of the libertarian magazine Reason have seemingly recently rediscovered for their purposes the font of White Supremisist Populism and important key ally of William Jennings Bryan — South Carolina Senator and Governor Benjamin Tillman — er… champion of the White Common Folk.  To quote him, from 1900, on the regional politics of the previous two decades:

“We have done our level best.  We have scratched our heads to find out how we could eliminate the last one of them.  We stuffed ballot boxes.  We shot them.  We are not ashamed of it.”

Somewhere with the words “we are not ashamed of it”, I hear echoes of Trent Lott’s statement that the people of Mississippi are “proud” in his famous quotation.

I am a tad surprised in the flourishes to the Populist tradition of Benjamin Tillman to have not seen Tom Watson pop through.  Tom Watson is celebrated in, for instance, Howard Zinn’s book for leading blacks and whites together in strikes — a model of racially harmonious Class Warfare in the Populist uprisings of the late nineteenth century.   Shortly thereafter, he gave up the ghost, caved into political realities, aligned himself with the “White Common folk”  — right there next to your Ben Tillmans.

Late Night Wars, again

Wednesday, January 13th, 2010

It is fashionable to bag on Jay Leno.

.

..

Yes, it is.

Anyways,
Years ago, David Letterman had a pretty hard proscription against the name “Jay Leno” being uttered on his show.  His show would bleep them out as with, say for instance, the showing of clip from the HBO “Late Shift” film.  The rule changed, probably around when Jay Leno widened his ratings margin over Letterman to a certain point and the rule began to look pointless.  I remember it was jarring when I first caught the Leno appearance — Letterman closed up a bit with the “Dave as Every Slouch”, on the sofa watching the skit just ending, saying “Uh — I wonder if Jay’s doing Headlines!” — click the remote.

Today, Letterman is apparently eating the drama up.

Well, you know, Jay Leno eventually lost his own phobia about uttering Johnny Carson’s name.

An odd thing about Leno as against Conan O’brien.  Conan O’brien apparently — publically at least, and you’d have to say with some element of self interest — has such a jewel-encrusted image of “The Tonight Show” as an Institution that a 12 am show cannot possibly be “The Tonight Show”.  It would be a breach of conduct against the ghosts of Steve Allen and Johnny Carson (and, um, if you want to toss in the guy who got into hot water for saying something about a toilet, fine).  The line from Conan O’brien’s defacto letter of Resignation, running off to Fox, which is a grabber — and Conan O’brien comes from a smart comedy writers’ background, doesn’t he?

It was my mistaken belief that, like my predecessor, I would have the benefit of some time and, just as important, some degree of ratings support from the prime-time schedule. Building a lasting audience at 11:30 is impossible without both.

It is fashionable to bag on Jay Leno.  Fun too!