Can't Completely Rule It Out

Here are a few things that belong in the category, "the more weight I attach, the more others will feel compelled to make light" (I've got to start writing about things that fall into a different category). Well, I guess I can stand the short-term break-even (or worse) that comes from this battle between attaching heaviness vs. being made light, in that matters of consequence endure and so I shall be vindicated for though fools may seek to rule the world.... I think I've already begun the making light process on my own. And so now, to be serious about what's serious (it is too). Or, as the title of this blog article states, here are some possibilities I cannot completely rule out, having experienced the strange things that I have (have too).

We've Got To Get Ourselves Back Off The Sofa (by Joni Mitchell)
In my previous blog article I mentioned how Jon Stewart of "The Daily Show" apparently drove by me Saturday (admittedly, no fingerprints to support this conviction). I also took the opportunity in that blog article to repeat my oft-made assertion that I am an influence on him (and Colbert as well, as I've also oft-asserted). Older blogs of mine copyrighted on Archive.Org confirm that I didn't just start saying this yesterday (this Blogspot site confirms no chronology of when I said what, as one can attach any date to any article, and so I refer to what is copyrighted to Archive.Org).

In this context, one might consider, as a possibility, that there is greater significance to the following videoclip than merely being an instance of like minds thinking alike (then again, perhaps it could strike you as confirmation of same, or perhaps, different minds that haven't the slightest to do with one another, or, that Steinhoff sure hit the nail on the head this time, or, I wonder why he's talking about Colbert, that looks like Stewart):



I believe the upcoming event Stewart and Colbert allude to in the videoclip could ultimately prove to be the biggest event of the year, or something along those lines. Humor is a medium, and what these two do in that medium is most serious, in my view. Yes, I am serious about the seriousness of humor even if many make light of the weight of.... but some might say I digress, and the opinion of those who feel that way is what matters most to me in the whole world.

Some may feel the need for me to spell out how it is that I believe the Sept. 3rd comment I made on Huff Post as JonathanDS fits in with the direction in which Colbert and Stewart are taking things. It's simple. I reacted to the idea of a Colbert rally with the idea that it be juxtaposed as completely separate yet alongside a Jon Stewart rally, both essentially vying to occupy virtually the same space, despite the expectation that, if anything, it should be one big rally. And that is precisely how they are playing things out at this point. Easily possible I am making too much of a like minds think alike idea, limited in originality, no big deal. Also very possible that this, the biggest event in the history of mankind (I'm only quoting Colbert), in terms of the way Colbert and Stewart are handling it, sprang from my pen. Can those who have followed my influence on things, both in general and specifically, completely ignore this possibility? Would someone pay for my plane fare so I can attend? Or maybe, go to CD Baby and listen to my songs so that, penny by penny, I might at least make it halfway across the country, where I might watch the proceedings from a TV in a dingy hotel room, muttering to myself about the people who wouldn't pay to listen to my songs at CD Baby, that I might afford to be a few miles closer to where things are happening? Don't I deserve at least that, enough song money to be within a thousand miles of it? By the way, I recommend my song, "Whatever Happened" (which is also available for free elsewhere on the Internet in higher quality than mp3, as well as the music video, I didn't just say that, I wonder if Jimi Hendrix' ghost is laughing at me for that, which would be quite an honor).

Stop Pointing That Erasure At Me
Also difficult for me to ignore: In my August 22nd blog article I correlated the book burning in Ray Bradbury's "Farenheit 451" to the suppressive mentality of Iran's president. Now in the news we see this Terry Jones character suddenly causing an international stir with his vile plans to have a book burning of the Quran. I am not pleased by this (please note my use of the word "vile"). Nevertheless, of all the book burning the world has seen, rarely has the idea of such received this level of attention, including in this instance condemnation from the Pentagon, the Pope, and most importantly, Hillary Clinton (unless you're Catholic and/or militaristic, please don't put me in the middle of this). All this less than three weeks after my book burning referencing blog article. I do recognize that only those who read the blog article upon its publication could testify to this, it being that, as mentioned earlier, this Blogspot site makes it possible to fiddle with dates. Nevertheless, for those who know what I am saying is true about my having posted a blog article on August 22nd that makes significant anti-book burning mention, and also for those who have by now learned to believe me: this is far from the first time the right-wing has used me to springboard their crap onto center-stage. I suppose they would consider it their true crowning achievement if I permitted it to silence me, or bug me. Well, I can recognize a bright side. You see, when one plays pool, one often aims for the bank, it is well known that this is how to hit certain balls into certain pockets and leave oneself well-positioned. I think it extremely possible that, after Terry Jones is finished playing the antagonist in this little drama, the larger story that emerges will be a positive one. People who might otherwise seem aligned against all Muslims showing their repugnance at such conduct. Etc.

I'd Like To Teach The World To Sing Like Jimi Hendrix
And finally, on Sept. 6th, immediately following my Sept. 5th blog article about seeing words of my song show up in somebody's Facebook posting (seemingly inadvertantly), President Obama used words from a Hendrix song in a speech, as if inadvertantly ("they talk about me like a dog" - "Stone Free" by Jimi Hendrix). Okay, not enough here to necessarily construe that this had anything whatsoever to do with my blog article the previous day. How about the fact that the same blog article of mine held back from observing Hendrix song postings by Facebook friends who presumably don't know each other, in that they coincided with my Dwight Hendricks ("Memphis Beat") blog articles? I held back on including mention of those Hendrix incidents, though it would have been germaine to my blog article, owing to the fact that many see posting a Hendrix song on Facebook as being as common as using the word, "the". I would generally concur, if not for the collective significance when seen alongside the other stuff to which I was referring. But it was too obscure a point for me to make in my Sept. 5th blog article, so I held back - now, perhaps, things are different (too late!). I have also indicated in previous blogs that I am an occasional influence on what the President of the United States says. And that he is an old friend of someone I know at work.

Nobody Knows The Trouble I've Hallucinated

Yeah, Well I'm The One Who Oughta Be Quarantining You
Some of us look at other people, figure a few things out, and then divide them up into three categories: Beginner, Intermediate and Advanced. It's a weakness, of course, in that we all belong in one group, we're all the same, we all know the same things, have the same background information, the same inclination, willingness and perspective in putting facts together, etc. It's silly that I scored 97 percentile on my college tests and that this can ever make me feel that I'm among stupider people. I get so silly sometimes, it's enough to drive me up the wall.

Don't Put This Section Together With Anything
A while ago someone I know gave me a box of Q-tips. She didn't really give them to me. My group in my company had a Christmas Party and I was the lucky one who received her gag gift. She's an old friend of President Obama, lived a few doors down during the Chicago days. Even before I knew of that relationship, even before Obama was the president, I laughed about the Q-tips.

Isolate This Section As Well
The Iranian President said something not too long ago regarding the American President. Because I'm secretly super-important in relation to Steven Spielberg, the most prominent Jewish man, and also because I'm secretly super-important in relation to Paul McCartney and Saturday Night Live and Ridley Scott and Tim Burton and James Cameron and Sting and Madonna and The Rolling Stones and countless other institutions that wield unimaginable influence over the hearts and minds of Americans and the rest of the world, the Iranian President joins in. Like so many others, he said something in a lexicon that is unknown to almost everyone, a lexicon of which certain individuals have been continually making use. But we're all the same, really, no Beginners, Intermediates or Advanced, and if one of us doesn't get something none of us do.

All Of Five Minutes
In some of my other blog articles I've commented on my influence on Jason Lee's TV show, "Memphis Beat", an influence I've characterized as having grown out of my influence earlier in Jason Lee's career. Such as my originating what became "My Name Is Earl", by sending my Earl-like idea to the producer of the 1995 movie, "Mallrats", Lee's first starring role, a movie which had been named for my video, "Mall Man".

Last night's "Memphis Beat" once again included a few things that, if put together with a few other things, spelled something to those I consider Intermediates and Advanced. As if there actually is such a thing as Intermediates and Advanced, that is, which there aren't, it's just me being some sort of silly, crazy con artist or something. But let's just pretend I'm right, okay, and then I can finish the train of thought and move on to the next subject and finish that and then we can get out early and catch a smoke before our next class.

In my 1993 video, "Mall Man" (do a search at Archive.Org), we have a big shopping mall mogul. In last night's Jason Lee episode we did as well. In "Mall Man" we have someone seeming to be a homeless person who really isn't. Likewise on last night's show. In "Mall Man" we have the idea of a woman getting a special gift for a fiance, but it just isn't for him. On last night's show, likewise. Any of these connections in of themselves, nothing. All of these things on last night's show taken together with "Mall Man", perhaps again, nothing. All of these things put together with what I've been saying in other blog articles regarding Jason Lee and "Mall Man", that is something. Not to the Beginners, but to the Intermediates and the Advanced. And there are those who will hand over the microphone to the Beginners and boost the speaker to full volume for precisely that reason.

A Day In The, Okay, Not A Day Hanging In The Balance
At work, Obama's old friend from the Chicago days was supposed to give me a piece of paper showing she had permission to take a day off, signed by her supervisor. WEEKS ago. Her supervisor already knows she took the day off, the timekeeping system already recorded that she used up her time off. But I still need that piece of paper, it's part of my job, so that I can put it in a drawer and then a box for five years or so until the obligatory period of a potential audit has passed (like that's gonna happen). She laughs when I remind her. That's what happens when you laugh when someone gives you Q-tips. I'm this close to giving up on this and moving on. I'm really divided on this.

You Did Not Just Say That
Two days ago or so Bolton that Bush Administration right-wing/white mustache guy said the Israelis have an eight-day window to attack Iran's nuclear sites, after that, it would release dangerous radiation if they did. I'm left-wing, he's right-wing. He has a white mustache, mine is brown (okay, I'm willing to admit there's a little gray there). We're apples and oranges, therefore, I don't have to think about this.

It's A Small World (And That's Even Without Circumstances Having Yet Reduced It To A Speck Of Dust)
A recent Facebook development in my life has put a certain red wire very close to a certain blue wire. I sure am glad someone else is in the middle of that one. Though it actually has a whole lot to do with me. And yet it doesn't. It touches on a big part of this lexicon business I've been referring to, the part which stretches in the direction of what the Iranian President has been secretly connecting with in some of his headline-grabbing remarks over the past several years. I sure am glad there are enough Beginners in my life to scream in my ear that I'm just being silly about this.

Down The Hatches
Making good progress on my latest video, "Down The Hatch," which is currently in danger of being renamed, "Down The Hatches," and then good luck doing a search for it after you've read it in sketch idea form at Archive.Org, or vice-versa.

Oh Yeah
It took me 45 or so years, but I finally figured out something from John Lennon. I count about 14 major Beatle songs that I was a significant influence on (something to which I've occasionally made reference), and this one belongs in that column. The thing I figured out is, in the Beatle song, "Rain," it's like, emotionally a rainy day versus a sunny day. A year or so later, in the Beatle song, "Penny Lane," Lennon's emotional harmonizing on the word "Blue" in "Blue suburban skies" is like, advocating that the skies are blue. Meanwhile back, "the fireman rushes in from the pouring rain". So, therefore, it's like, a rainy day versus a sunny day.

I bet if I had really worked at it I could have gotten this in only 22.5 or so years. Then again, I hope I never stop being a Beginner, finding things that were always there but are only now exploding off the page in front of me.

Special Thanks To Washington, Obama And McCartney

Unreal Dream
My July 23rd blog ended with my stating:

"I'm sure that, whatever specific elements might someday get glued together through the development of this concept, those elements will eventually find some way to unglue themselves from it."

My July 25th blog began with:

The image of the sword in the stone (Excalibur), which was followed in that blog by an allusion to the legend regarding it, which is about only one person being able to remove the sword from the stone (King Arthur).

So on the one hand (7/23), elements that, though they might one day become glued together, someday they will find a way to unglue themselves from each other. On the other hand (7/25), two things bonded together that only one person can separate.

I shall now bring together things that should unglue simply by breathing on them, or sneezing on them, or chewing on them, or whatever you feel like doing to them. I do so for your amusement, and also on the strange, remote offchance that it has been dictated to me to do so, by Paul McCartney and/or President Obama, via things regarding tonight's fantastic broadcast of McCartney being honored at the White House. And may I take this opportunity to say, that broadcast was a golden moment, and I have no desire to pull apart what came together there. I have nothing but thanks for their having done this. I would give them both an award to go with the Gershwin Award McCartney was given by the President, if I had one, not that I could do more to make that moment hold together than what has already been done. The specialness of the evening was remarkable.

I won't be backing up any of the following statements which, combined, comprise my theory that I might have been meant to see a connection in this McCartney/Obama event to my "Steinhoff's Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'". So many of my previous blogs already go on at length to prove to the intelligent that I am a secretly super-important person to whom things happen that are far beyond normal experience, if you put pieces of puzzles together left by people who don't wish to speak too loud. I know this must appear to a newcomer as totally audacious, crazy, etc. Did I say "newcomer"? You could imagine yourself to be well familiar with what I have contended in the past, however, if you never bothered to follow the details, for lack of intelligence, inclination, ulterior motives regarding certain powerful situations, etc., then that which I do in these here type things will always be new/unfamiliar to you.

1. Paul McCartney has on innumerable occasions said and done things intended to be in relation to me. I have known many who know him, and I have been a very significant influence on him over the years, going back to the '60s and continuing to the present day. On my first few days ever in London in 1983, had I run across the train tracks at Baker Street Underground Station to be on the same platform as he, when we both were nearly the only ones in that station, we may even have shaken hands. Several days following our not shaking hands, I was invited to a dinner party by his next-door neighbor during the '70s. Unconnected events, perhaps....

2. A number of years ago, a song McCartney wrote with Elvis Costello (who appeared in tonight's broadcast of McCartney being honored by the President at the White House) contained a line, "She wants to shout at the back of his head." I interpreted the origin of that lyric as coming from something I came up with for my video, "Steinhoff's Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'", wherein a character hallucinates that a woman is shouting at the back of his head.

3. A recent interview with McCartney about playing at the White House had him choosing to characterize the experience as being very comfortable, where one felt one could say anything, like when one is speaking to a cousin. In my "Uncle's Dream" video, a character is specially advised not to feel free to say anything when in the presence of a particular important individual. My cousin and his wife appeared in my "Uncle's Dream" video.

4. In my "Uncle's Dream" video, there are many references to the power someone has over a most important person due to her playing music before him. The nature of this idea is not totally unrelated to the nature of tonight's McCartney/Obama broadcast. (I certainly do not mean to infer anything, I am simply making an objective statement.)

5. When President W had that whole front-page episode over putting his hand on the shoulder of the German Chancellor and her responding with apparent revulsion, the incident occurred one day following my having emphasized the significance of an identical act (as described in my "Back To The Political Future" pdf at Archive.Org) that occurs in my "Dostoyevsky's 'Uncle's Dream'" video being used on a "Monk" episode (almost all episodes of "Monk" made inside-references to my material, which I attribute to my having once known the former President of USA, which made "Monk", having some kind of hand in it, it seems to me. He's always doing stuff like that in relation to me, seems to me. And at some point after that W incident, when W stated that his reading tastes were very epileptic, I believed this related to that previous situation, in that Dostoyevsky is one of the world's most well known epileptics, despite it obviously seeming to be that W meant to use the word, "eclectic". Paul McCartney was widely quoted as having said, while at the White House, that it was nice to now have a president who knows what a library is (PBS today defended not editing that into tonight's broadcast). This was McCartney touching on the subject of W's reading.

6. There was a moment in tonight's broadcast when Stevie Wonder appeared to respond negatively to McCartney putting his hand on his shoulder by pulling his hand off (as if it was overdoing it, as it followed McCartney kissing Wonder's head).

6. Once many years ago when McCartney was a guest on Saturday Night Live, he played a butler character who did a few things relating to the butler character in my "Uncle's Dream" video.

7. The female star of my "Uncle's Dream" video, my friend Sandra Church (former Broadway star and Brando's wife in a movie), once mentioned to me going to Thanksgiving Dinner at Judy Collins'. Judy Collins was a very close friend of Linda McCartney.

8. Tonight on a separate show, a nightly news comments show, someone appeared with comments whom I've never seen before, and I've seen this nightly news comments show a lot. She had the same, somewhat uncommon last name as a person I know who is a friend of Obama from Chicago. Obviously not connected to the other person with the same last name, yet interesting that this person should be there to bring the other person to mind today of all days.

9. I have occasionally noticed my influence on things said by the President the day following my putting something out. This was also true of W and Clinton.

10. Now unglue everything in items 1-9 for future use elsewhere in other contexts. But do me a favor and find some place to store these elements in the meantime. You could rearrange the letters, I think they could all write out something from Shakespeare (though you may need to add or subtract a few punctuation marks). I promise not to sign the above with anything other than a pencil, so it should all be simple to unglue.

From Last To First
In my previous blog I referred to something I wrote 30 years ago, "Two Hours In The Life Of George Washington". I have since then posted a pdf of it at Archive.Org.

Doesn't Count
Nothing to report regarding any influence from me on Tuesday's "Memphis Beat", unlike most of their other episodes (which I proved/demonstrated in previous blogs).

[Unless you count the fact that Tuesday's episode showed the influence of "My Name Is Earl", an earlier Jason Lee TV show that first originated from something I had sent to someone I once knew, who was the producer of the first movie Jason Lee starred in. "Earl" references on "Memphis Beat" shouldn't really count, though, as "Memphis Beat" stars Jason Lee, so if his references to his own earlier show have to be thought of as automatically coming back to me, all of our lists of who we might owe credit to would be endless.]

Mr. Combo and the Crazy Combinations Sing You Some Tunes

In order not to upstage the meeting taking place at this moment between Paul McCartney and President Obama, I would firstly ask that whoever forwards to Mr. McCartney important Jonathan D. Steinhoff news postpone this item until after they are finished. I can now begin in good conscience.

I am pleased to announce that my newest collection of songs, Mr. Combo and the Crazy Combinations Sing You Some Tunes (by Jonathan D. Steinhoff) will soon (perhaps in another day, or two, or perhaps in another week) be available for download at CD Baby.com! This will be the first release of a collection of my songs since my 2005 "Enough To Eclipse", which was something of a Paul McCartney influence, as I/my material often am/is (which Paul McCartney knows, even if not everybody else does).

The fact that:

• I am announcing the release of Mr. Combo and the Crazy Combinations Sing You Some Tunes on June 2nd, the 43rd anniversary to the day of the American release of Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band;

Combined with the fact that:

• I was a significant influence on a number of Beatles songs, including Eleanor Rigby, a song which precipitated Sgt. Peppers in that Sgt. Peppers suggests the sublimation of The Beatles in order to promote the plight of the lonely (Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band), Eleanor Rigby containing the refrain about what to do with all the lonely people;
  

Combined with how:

• I never get monetarily compensated for all of my contributions, which is semi-communistic or at least anti-capitalistic and downloading Mr. Combo songs will address this injustice;
  

Combined with how:

• This collection of my songs even has a few never-before-released, and all of the songs are from after "Enough To Eclipse";
  

Combined with the fact that:

• Stevie Wonder is also at this moment meeting with Mr. McCartney and Pres. Obama, his crying harmonica in Sting's "(Starting Up A) Brand New Day" having begun with my crying saxophone in my "(Build It All Up Into A) Brand New River of Love" (copyright 1999);
  

Combined with how:

• Mr. Combo will usher into the world a new age of combining things....
  

All adds up to this (to paraphrase "A Day In The Life"):

Mr. Combo would love to turn you on!

Honk If You Like Cars

I've been accumulating no small number of things to describe of considerable significance, at least by certain standards, however, for this blog installment I will limit myself to addressing something of potentially great significance.  It could regard the automobile accident (that may have been no accident) experienced yesterday by the wife of Harry Reid, Senate Majority Leader.

However I lay out the basis for this statement, it requires a little time, a little research follow-through on the part of the reader.  So please get the bleep out of here you tedious know-it-alls who entitle yourselves to opinions without any sense of the importance of arriving at an opinion in a responsible, intelligent manner.  This isn't the place for you.

• As I describe in my July 3, 2009 blog (and elsewhere in various other blogs of mine), the weekly TV sitcom that was Tom Hanks' first really big break, "Bosom Buddies", resulted from a conversation I had with someone.  

• In my December 26, 2009 video, "Steven Spielberg And The Mall Man Factor" (posted at archive.org), I show how the Spielberg/Hanks movie, "The Terminal," was very significantly influenced by my 1993 "Mall Man" video (also viewable at archive.org).  

• It therefore did not come out of left-field when Hanks' image on the cover of Time Magazine a week or so ago bore a strong similarity to a recurring image in "Mall Man":

In both instances, the photographic efffect is to use a very pronounced concentration of light on the face of the subject, in contrast with everything else in the image.  This isn't to say that no one else has ever used this effect - of course it is something we see from time to time.  Rather, the significance lies in the alignment of the previously described details in combination with the usage of this effect in this instance.  The fact that it was only recently (Dec. 26, 2009) that I pointed out the relationship between Hanks and "Mall Man".  I suppose, if you are very young, something that happened two and a half months ago was not recent.  If you are Tom Hanks, my December 26th video should have been an event containing a degree of significance.  One would not be surprised to find a reaction - a reaction in this form.  One may also wish to read (or reread) my January 23, 2010 blog.

• A day or so before the appearance of this Time Magazine cover, I saw for the first time in years (driving by me on my way to work) a woman I knew, or a look-alike of a woman I knew, whose family was close to mine when we were young (including going on a vacation together).  Her late father became Senior Editor of Money Magazine.  Money Magazine is part of the same company as Time Magazine.

• A number of years ago, while her father was Senior Editor of Money Magazine, her brother, Woody, who was also a friend, was killed in an automobile accident (that may not have been an accident).  His car suddenly got a flat tire, he had to suddenly pull off the freeway onto the shoulder to fix it, which was when he was run over and killed.  This could have been a set-up.  One has to consider this possibility, if one is realistic about the nature of the position his father held.  The Senior Editor of Money Magazine makes decisions that can affect how people invest billions (collectively), and we all know that when that kind of money is involved, shady doings designed to gain influence/control can occur.  As is also true if you are the Senate Majority Leader.

• Yesterday, the same day as this "accident" experienced by Reid's wife, Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg were guests of President Obama at The White House, a "movie night" for the screening of something they jointly produced, entitled, "Pacific".

This would not be the first time that someone performing an insidious act threaded it through matters that connected in some way to me, nor would it be the first time that the perpetrator(s) threaded into it matters connected in some way to Steven Spielberg at the same time as myself.  As an example, one may wish to read my blog of March 23rd (and others) regarding the death of Natasha Richardson, whose husband, Liam Neeson, was working with Spielberg at the time of her death.

Balls Rolling, Wheels On Fire

I had hoped that my blog entry to follow my previous blog entry might somehow keep the ball rolling, significance-wise, as that blog contained the ball-rolling announcement that I had completed my video, "Steven Spielberg And The 'Mall Man' Factor". Unfortunately, it does not. And yet for some the things I will be reporting this time around are no less significant:

YESTERDAY
We all know of the interesting situation at NBC involving Jay and Conan, and their dream of recapturing the days of "Must See TV", which was mainly their "Friends" and "Seinfeld" sitcom lineup on Thursdays when you get right down to it. And a few of us know that the NBC show that took over the timeslot of "Friends", "My Name Is Earl," which starred Jason Lee, grew out of an idea, "The Fun Guy", which I sent to Sean Daniel, the producer of the movie that featured Jason Lee's first big role, "Mallrats". Sean Daniel was the first person from whom I had learned of the college I attended, CalArts. He produced "Mallrats" two years after my "Mall Man" video, it being that Sean Daniel movies tend to contain things regarding my work, in this case the title.

So I naturally felt totally responsible personally for the problem Conan is now experiencing, as all things in the NBC universe are interconnected (though of course the NBC universe has been disconnected from the actual universe, in order to insulate their important energy). I therefore phoned Sean Daniel, not in connection with my just-released Spielberg video (which includes a reference to Daniel of no small significance), but with an idea for a new NBC show. Sean could not come to the phone because he was busy driving past someone in an automobile or truck (I may be wildly conjecturing here), but someone representing himself as his Director of Development who decided to pick up the phone himself did speak to me.

I explained how it was I who had given to Sean that which led to "My Name Is Earl," through Sean's involvement. I mentioned the significance of this fact in light of the current NBC situation, and then described how to find my idea for a new NBC show: it is called "Time Colonies" and posted at Archive.Org, just search for it there.

The next day (aka Saturday, aka yesterday) someone who looked enough like Sean Daniel to actually be Sean Daniel drove by me as I drove down some random-enough Los Angeles boulevard.

What happened next is something nobody in the world could have seen coming! I turned my car around! My strange, bizarre thinking was that, if Sean had arranged to drive by me, he might have someone watching my reaction to this (as the producer of the "Mummy" movies, I figure Sean must make about $11.30 an hour, and so if he went without dessert for a few months he could probably save up enough money to pay someone to occupy the position of a "report-his-reaction-to-me" person, an important position in Hollywood to which many aspire).

Though I had turned my car around, I knew that it would be impossible for me to actually catch up with him to ask about his wife and kids and Spielberg and Earl and the weather. An instant later I came upon a strip mall, and this strip mall had a store called, "Timeland". Who could have seen this coming when Sean Daniel drove by me? It would have been better if Sean had arranged to drive past me nearby to a store called "My Name Is" or "Time Colonies", but under the circumstances.... of course, who could have guessed that I would have turned my car around? Nobody! Why would I?

At the strip mall, someone who looked enough like Rosanna Arquette to actually be Rosanna Arquette walked by. I now refer you to my November 22, 2008 blog entry with relation to its Rosanna Arquette reference.

I then left the strip mall and continued on, and eventually Courteney Cox Arquette almost definitely drove by me. Possibly also David Arquette. Possibly also CCA's BFF, Jennifer Aniston. Definitely Lisa Kudrow drove by at some point.

Also the guy who plays Ryan on "The Office". Also, a car from out of state with the word "Ryan" in the license plate drove in front of me for blocks and blocks. Out of state plates are often called upon by people who do these types of things, to expand the options when available California plates don't serve the purpose.

The Ryan stuff was likely in relation to Stuart Cornfeld (like Sean, Stuart is often referred to in my blogs), as I had just left a message for Stuart regarding Steven Spielberg. In my previous blog I state that "The Colbert Report" referenced my Spielberg video when it was a mere work-in-progress (they join in on Steinhoff things over there at Colbert from time to time, see previous blogs). This time it was "The Daily Show" (companion to "The Colbert Report") that came into it: the night following the message to Stuart, Jon Stewart (who I hope never has children or grandchildren given the first name of Stuart, out of concern that future generations will already have their hands full) interviewed Maggie Gyllenhaal, during which I recognized inside-reference to something specifically contained in my message. I occasionally encounter such cross-pollination between Cornfeld/"The Office"/"The Daily Show"-"The Colbert Report". One would tend to ascribe this to the fact that two "Office" cast members are "Daily Show" alum; Cornfeld starred "Office" star Jenna Fischer in "Blades of Glory"; other stuff.


DECEMBER 31
On December 31st I believe I drove by Jennifer Aniston, and then David Arquette, and then Jennifer Aniston, and Tim Robbins. Robbins was in "War of the Worlds," a movie I refer to in my Spielberg video. I certainly do not mention him here in relation to his role in "The Player", at least not at this time, and hopefully never in relation to my situation, Stuart and Sean love me, haven't spoken to either in years and years and years, but, well anyway, one sees how I might feel called upon to address "The Player" here.... Robbins was in "IQ" as well, which also contained something put there because of its relation to me. However, now I am clearly and stupidly deviating from any train of thought, or any that I am anywhere near to at the moment).


THE PRESIDENT, TERRORISM AND BABY OIL?
(or The Intersection Of Robert Johnson And Johnson & Johnson)

THE PRESIDENT
As is not unusual for me, Obama has lately been including things in speeches within 24 hours from when I put them forward. Huffington Post is back to not printing my comments from time to time but then something in the same comment shows up coming from someone on TV such as Bill Maher or the president within 24 hours, which says to me that they are guarding against the liability that would have resulted from my being able to point at it. Yes, I am aware that sometimes people do naturally have the same idea at the same time, especially if it's a likely and relevant surmisal. No, my experience and intelligence tells me this ain't that.

BABY OIL
On January 4th, I found on my desk an article of mail from Johnson & Johnson that was postmarked December 30th. Mail from Johnson & Johnson in my area is akin to the idea of a big bright red envelope amidst nothing but grey envelopes - it sticks out, a lot. The article of mail was meant for someone named "Jill Uhle" (pronounced "Yule", as in Christmas, as in Underpants Bomber), however, they had put "Jill Bacon" as her last name. The media-grabbing death of the Johnson & Johnson heiress occurred between December 30th and January 4th, i.e., between when the article of mail was posted and when it was received.

TERRORISM?
In my blog of 9.13.09, I refer to this how-could-they-have-known postmarking as something that happened in relation to a 911 clue I received. In my experience, which is not anything you're likely to find in the experience of most other people, this is potential reason for concern.

Perhaps: Obama, following what I described in my 9.13.09 blog, wanted to see my reaction to receiving an apparently similar clue - he could have used his authority to gain the December 30th postmark illegitimately after-the-fact. "Let's test him" might just be the kind of phrase they say from time to time out there where the president sits. Or: perhaps some sickos in organized crime wanted to kill a super rich woman (and by so doing intimidate other rich people) while threading my desk into it, through also copying an MO (modus operandi) I had described. Or: perhaps terrorists are doing something, suggested by the Yule/911 MO references? Can one totally ignore that possibility, after all that one has experienced from one being secretly super-important?

If so, what would Bacon, the last name they chose to use, mean here? Six degrees of Kevin Bacon? There is only one thing in the lexicon of all things Steinhoff (a lexicon that has frequently come into these matters, leading to the assumption of a database somewhere) that Bacon brings to mind: the famous artist, Francis Bacon, was very much in connection with Hugh Davies, the brother of a good friend of mine was I was growing up in Princeton, New Jersey, Phil. Hugh was practically his agent, did a book about him, did art shows starring him. As things first began happening between The Beatles and myself around when I first met Hugh's brother, Phil, in 1966 when I was ten, and as Phil's family is English, I have subsequently conjectured that there is a possibility of a connection to be made, that I have been led to think this in view of Phil's English background. There also exists a connection, from an earlier day, between Paul McCartney and Francis Bacon.

A few years ago, I sent something to Hugh to pass along to his brother Phil, which included a reference to the Beatles song, "Paperback Writer". Two days later McCartney discussed "Paperback Writer" with an interviewer. This is not the song that normally comes up every time McCartney does an interview.

Also Princeton-related is the fact that Johnson & Johnson's headquarters was in Princeton, as was conspicuous to those of us who lived there - one would periodically drive by their enormous, fenced off grounds, upon which one saw the giant "Johnson & Johnson" sign on the lawn, on Rosedale (which always brings to mind the Cream song, only not in this instance).

Beyond Say-ing

Can anyone who knows how secretly important I am seriously ignore the possibility that Kenya West's (subsequently super-soundbited) debating of who should have won an MTV Music Awards was apropos of my blog earlier that day (my previous blog, Sept. 13th)? Wherein I specifically referred to the ending of my "Teddy Tinyfingers" sketch idea, the part where the concept of winning is the focus? Where I refer to how this winning reference at the end of my sketch idea was several days later picked up by President Obama his first week in office, "giving the media their soundbite" (quoted from my blog of Sept. 13th)?

Bravo, Kanye, for giving the media their soundbite (which I believe subtly serves to embarrass the Republicans for not even beginning to accept Obama as the a legitimate victor of the last election). And bravo, the strange magic by which President Obama became part of it - presumably by being "inadvertently" quoted off the record as referring to Kenya as a "jackass". Some of us adults have learned that certain things that supposedly happen "inadvertently" may or may not actually be all that incredibly inadvertent.

A September 6th article about Lennon for the most part focused on John Lennon's ongoing professional relationship with a reporter who crafted articles about him over the years. This was one of the first times that I can remember, in the entire history of The Beatles (I've followed them a bit), in which anyone has really put the focus on Lennon in relation to a reporter (not counting Lennon discussing the interview that contained his controversial statement that The Beatles were super-popular; or the interview style of the song, "With A Little Help From My Friends"; or the Village Voice columnist Howard Smith - for whom I worked in 1974 - and Lennon publicizing their friendship, Howard being Lennon's guide when he and Yoko moved to NYC in 1972). I actually felt baited (I held my tongue at the time) by this September 6th article, to tie it in with my July 5th blogged comments about Paul McCartney working things out with reporters:

It is additionally relevant here to make mention that is has become my surmisal that there are certain articles about McCartney wherein he has played a major part in the putting together of the article, beyond just being the reporter's subject: this includes exact release time of the article, insertion of certain key elements without it being left to chance as to whether the reporter would prefer that such elements be included, article titles, etc. I'm sure no one sees anything intrinsically wrong with a person of his stature taking steps to avoid being left wide open to everyone to whom he grants an interview.

I believe it could have happened with Obama's interview in which he was quoted "inadvertently" in relation to Kenya.

I also would add that, earlier in the day of Obama's recent speech before Congress, I emailed someone at work about the approaching room reservation "season". Obama likewise transplanted the word "season" that day, in his speech. I know neither of us are the first to transplant this word, but I note that this happened on the same day. I pre-anticipated the possibility of Obama incorporating my words into this speech, as he has done before. I also pre-anticipated that there would be something big at the MTV award show tying in with me, as this is something I have observed regarding their award shows many times before. Allow me also to draw your attention to the fact that one of my two dozen co-workers remains friends with Obama, having lived down the street from him in Chicago a certain number of years back.

Exactly how could my previous blog have contained something that would lead to a possible indirect involvement by the President of the United States? Re-read it. One word atta time. At a single bound.

Handful

In addition to this week’s Monk/Steinhoff videoclip, and another videoclip, related to my comedy sketch idea, "Teddy Tinyfingers", I first have a few other things to report:

A Few Other Things To Report First
1. The special edition of the show, “The Office” that followed the Superbowl last week made substantial inside references to my material, unfortunately, it gets a little complicated to explain. That leaves it with those who trust my facility for identifying these things believing it, and the rest, well, nobody has time for everybody. As to the specifics, I’m sure I’ll go into it someday, perhaps after next year’s Superbowl?

2. This week’s “Life On Mars” (2.4.09) made several inside references for my benefit. Again, I’m not going into specifics at this time. I will observe that I made a reference to “Life On Mars” in my November 22, 2008 blog, and from that moment anticipated that I would eventually be seeing them make an abundantly clear reference to my material. At one point I thought last week’s (1.28.09) “Life On Mars” included a reference, but changed my mind when I saw it back. Now I’m not so sure. This is not entirely unlike the time I wrote a comedy sketch idea around “Law & Order, Criminal Intent”, followed by that show making inside references to my material.

3. This year's Grammy Awards, not unlike any number of major award shows in the past, appears to be making use of a concept of mine. Specifically, the backdrop of little cubes drifting around behind the presenters bears a significant resemblance to my use of bricks drifting around during a section of the music video for my song, "Whatever Happened".

"Teddy Tinyfingers" and Christian Bale
Besides my Monk/Steinhoff videoclip, I also have with this blog another videoclip, regarding my January 14th comedy sketch idea, “Teddy Tinyfingers”. But first a few words about Christian Bale. I notice that all this talk about his on-the-set “tirade” actually began just two weeks following my "Teddy Tinyfingers" comedy sketch idea, through the surfacing of a recording of Bale. The Bale story first broke back in July 2008, but never took off until the recording was heard. This is unusual, for a half-year-old story of this variety to suddenly receive new life in this way. I further observe that my “Teddy Tinyfingers” comedy sketch idea regards an on-the-set argument between Johnny Depp and Tim Burton (my fellow CalArts alum on whom I have been a major influence). I therefore wonder whether it isn't upon me to weigh in on the Christian Bale matter, which I see as having potentially been given new life by “Teddy Tinyfingers” (an extreme statement only to those unfamiliar with the kind of impact my works have been known to have): I find it most interesting that Mr. Bale is the person who gave that incredibly inspired performance in “American Psycho”, the best performance of his career, or for that matter what would be a great performance in anybody’s career. In that movie he artfully delivered a humorous insight into the idea that people who are perfectly behaved, people who might ostracize a member of their own circle should they so much as have a hair out of place or perform a public faux pas, may on the inside just as easily also be sadistic, twisted psychotics, perhaps an outgrowth of a suppressive social world - a social world with values so disconnected, as to grant its greatest approval only to those most adept at observing proper social decorum. Who doesn’t appreciate the emotions expressed in Christian Bale’s real-life tirade, and immediately forgive? And who doesn’t also get that emotions dwelling in actors on film sets cannot be viewed by normal standards? So why so a short leash, so to speak, when one looks at the public response? Let's keep it real: Christian Bale is entitled. Of course, one nevertheless understands his public apology, as we've all had to placate those devoid of all insight.

"Teddy Tinyfingers" and Others
And so now, a special videoclip regarding, well, see for yourself:



Monk/Steinhoff 2.6.09 Videoclip
So finally, this week's Monk/Steinhoff videoclip. (I hope those all about Monk appreciate why one of the moments from the February 6th "Monk" episode was determined to belong more in the previous rather than the following videoclip.)

To Have Won

The first week of Barack Obama's presidency has ended (for those who think of Friday as the end of the week, even in the case of weeks that begin on a Tuesday) with the kind of crystallizing soundbite from the President that the media seeks, "I won". The following quote from the Wall Street Journal blog can be found repeated throughout the media:

"January 23, 2009, 2:32 pm

"Obama to GOP: ‘I Won’

"....With those two words — 'I won' — the Democratic president let the Republicans know that debate has been put to rest Nov. 4 .... Democratic and Republican aides confirmed the exchange. A White House spokesman said he wasn’t immediately aware of the exchange. The aides who heard the remarks stressed that it wasn’t as boldly partisan as it might sound."

What you will not learn about from those discussing this is the fact that those two words are identical to the closing line of "Teddy Tinyfingers," the January 14, 2009 comedy sketch idea I submitted for the January 17th "Saturday Night Live", to which considerable reference has been made in my blogs (including mention of an inside reference to it on the January 17th SNL).

The performance by Sting and Stevie Wonder of Sting's song, "Brand New Day" was the closing song and climax of "The Neighborhood Ball: An Inauguration Celebration," broadcast the evening of Inauguration Day live on ABC TV (and broadcast taped on the west coast). Of all the shows on TV relating to the inauguration on Inauguration Day, this was the primary mass consumption television product (other than the Inauguration itself), and included the President, his wife, the Vice President, and his wife (among others).

My previous blog discussed how that same closing song, "Brand New Day," resulted from a song I created, "Brand New River of Love".

Is it really so difficult to figure out from whence came Obama's choice of words, "I won," at this point in time/history?

Still Around

A new season of "Monk" being upon us, a new season Monk/Steinhoff videoclips are as well. Many others can be found on YouTube (where I am "Zoomsteinhoff"), however, since the "Simpsons" episode (by which I do not mean episode of "The Simpsons" - see my November 30th blog, "Give My Regards To Silence"), I plan to steer clear of YouTube when it comes to new postings of videoclips containing references to commercial works (in spite of the unwritten law of entitlement when one considers that these commercial works involve my material).

One thing to add to this January 9, 2009 Monk/Steinhoff videoclip posted here: This Monk episode made the word "Gosford" key; I sent an email regarding the movie "Gosford Park" in December to the former USA Network president referred to in all of my Monk/Steinhoff videoclips (my "didtheyreadit.com" email technology showed that someone did in fact open and read that email for eight minutes):




I recently had the opportunity to see on TV the movie, "The Darwin Awards," which includes David Arquette among its stars. Hence, this videoclip:




For those who read comments to postings at Huffington Post, the other day I commented (as JonathanDS2U) to an article about the celebrities scheduled to be part of Obama's inauguration. I made a statement that Sting has my permission to sing "Starting Up A Brand New Day" there. To those aware of my relationship to the creation of this song, my giving of permission might be viewed as something that could materially translate into to a more positive vibe at the actual event, which in turn could lift up the nation and so forth. No need to thank me.

Peek-A-Boo, ICU

Having recently been reinstated as a secret, unacknowledged contributor to "The Daily Show", "The Colbert Report", and "Saturday Night Live", I therefore felt it as not inappropriate to come up with something. First though, a brief mention regarding the recent indications of reinstatement:

1. I've already referenced the Daily Show indications in recent blogs.
   
2. On SNL last night they had the joke that Sarah Palin went to see "The Bush Doctrine" movie in NYC's Times Square, and found the title misleading. In my Sept. 16th blog, I refer to my joke that Sarah Palin found misleading the title of the movie, "An Inconvenient Truth" - it was not about dismantling the idea that the stork brings babies (my implication being that she had attempted to provide a form of sex education to her one-time unpregnant daughter). Were one familiar with the consistency with which SNL has made reference to my material, one would be more likely to appreciate this as more than coincidence.
3. Several days ago when I was thanked at work during a national videoconference for organizing the videoconference, I made a muscle and pointed to it. That night at the opening of "The Colbert Report", Colbert made muscles in general reference to the greatness attributed to him. Were one familiar with my past observations that "The Colbert Report" occasionally gathers material from infiltrating my work situation (there are only several people regarding whom I consistently make this claim, Colbert being one of them), one would be more likely to appreciate this as more than coincidence.

And now my new SNL idea:

PEEK-A-BOO, ICU

A comedy sketch idea by Jonathan D. Steinhoff, 9/28/08

[Tom Brokaw is sitting alone on a stage, at a table, facing the audience. On the table are two video cell phones, perched on cell phone stands, facing each other. On one cell phone can be seen live, standing at a podium, McCain, Obama is seen live standing at a podium on the other cell phone. A clear water glass and a water glass pitcher are also on the table.]

Brokaw: Good evening everyone, and welcome to the second presidential debate. Some of you may have noticed that, instead of Senators John McCain and Barrack Obama being present together onstage, there are instead video cell phones on the table, upon which each can be seen, live. You see (clears throat), we noticed at the previous presidential debate that the candidates seemed a little reluctant to speak directly to each other.

Obama: John wouldn’t even look at me, Tom.

McCain: I was trying to concentrate.

Brokaw: And so what we’ve done here, the thing we decided to do…

Obama: I had nothing to do with this decision. Absolutely nobody checked with me first.

McCain (smiling and winking): Uh, nor, uh, me, right Tom?

Brokaw: What we’re doing is, we have two video cell phones with each candidate, the video cell phones positioned to face each other. Our hope is that gradually the candidates will feel more comfortable with each other, and later on during the debate perhaps, we can remove the video cell phones and have them face each other directly.

Obama: As you wish. (muttering) Might as well be a radio debate.

McCain: We did quite well before there even was such a thing as television, or cell phones, or…. Whatever you want to do, Tom.

[Brokaw pours himself some water, has a sip, then places the water glass in between the two video cell phones.]

Brokaw: My first question is for you, Senator McCain.

Obama: Excuse me, uh, Tom, I’m sorry to interrupt, but, uh, you put your water glass on the table between the two video cell phones. So that, well, now all that I can see is the water glass, basically. I can make out a little bit of movement of colors on the other side of the water glass, but other than that….

McCain: That’s perfectly okay with me, Tom, if you want to put your water glass there that’s fine, I don’t mind a bit.

Obama: I can just sort of make out the color of Senator McCain’s clothes now with the water glass there. Is this supposed to be like some amusement park mirror debate? Because, I mean….

Brokaw: Should I move the glass to the left or the right. I’m not sure which way….

McCain: It’s fine where it is, Tom. I would prefer that you leave your glass where it is.

Obama: You know, metaphorically, this all sort of reminds me of the way Senator McCain’s vice presidential running mate, Sarah Palin, seems to find things to hide behind whenever she’s called upon to answer a real question.

McCain: Please, we’re just talking about where Tom wants to put his water glass. For goodness sake, he is the debate moderator, isn’t he entitled to a glass of water?

Obama: John, is that really the issue? Tom, uh, to the left, Tom. No, that just made it worse.

Brokaw: This way then?

McCain: I’m still waiting for the first question.

Obama: It really shouldn’t be so complicated to move a water glass away from two cell phones.

Brokaw: Yes, well, if you recall, in the previous debate, Senator McCain demonstrated a certain reluctance to look directly at you.

McCain: I was just trying to concentrate.

Obama: I see, so then the truth is, Tom, you deliberately placed the water glass there to block our view of each other.

Brokaw: I’m sorry John, I told you he wouldn’t go along with the water glass thing.

McCain: I have no idea what you’re talking about, Tom.

Obama: It’s like I’m looking at an amusement park mirror.

McCain: You’ve said that already.

Obama: Tom, can I at least ask that you drink some more water out of the glass, I can sort of see his form better when there’s less water in the glass.

McCain: Can we just wait until Tom is thirsty before we ask him to drink more water? For goodness sake.

Brokaw: That might be a good question. John, would you say the glass is half full or half empty?

Obama: Why would you ask - Tom, I just want you to drink a little more water. Now look, I’ve shown I’m ready to compromise on this, even more than I should, quite honestly. I didn’t ask you to remove the glass altogether.

Brokaw: John? Half full, half empty. Which would you say?

McCain: I, uh….

Brokaw: Senator McCain, one last time, half-full or half-empty?

McCain: Half full or half empty?

Obama: I just sort of see this white blur. And now I know you’re going to try to say that remark is racially motivated, but it’s the truth, I….

McCain: Here’s what Senator Obama doesn’t understand.

Obama: What? What don’t I understand?

McCain: Live from New York, it’s Saturday Night!

THE END

"How To Endorse Obama If You Are Paul McCartney" Instruction Guide

In my previous blog I introduced an idea that may need no real introduction: that Paul McCartney should endorse Obama as an appropriate rechanneling of the optimism about the world generated by "The Beatles Movement" (Or was the term "Beatlemania"? I recall the adult establishment back then, via the media, found the term "Beatlemania" the acceptable way of framing things, as much for its non-authenticating of the seriousness of The Beatles as for any other reason). This time, a blog in which I will provide a "How To Endorse Obama If You Are Paul McCartney" Instruction Guide. A few related things first.

It is worth making note here of the fact that I was personally responsible the last time Paul McCartney made a (surprise) appearance on Saturday Night Live. Eight days before that "surprise" sketch about poison in which Paul McCartney appeared with Martin Short and Steve Martin, I emailed my Paul McCartney intermediary that Paul should do a comedy sketch based on my "Recipe For Fun". And so, an SNL sketch about poison featuring Paul McCartney was born. Without going into too many details about what prompted me to make that suggestion, I will say that it had something to do with a matter related to John Kerry (incidentally, it was Kerry who chose Obama to deliver the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, which was the moment credited with bringing Obama onto the national "stage").

When I made that suggestion to Paul McCartney, I seriously expected something to result, based on previous experience. In this case, however, I appreciate that I am not asking of Paul the same kind of thing, and I have never let my power to make suggestions that are given serious consideration turn me into a bossy "now stand on your head" kind of person. I do not even know if Paul McCartney knows how to stand on his head. There are innumerable photos of McCartney doing different things, yet I do not recall seeing even one in which he stands on his head. By the way, I do not believe asking him to endorse Obama is in any way like asking him to stand on his head. Yet perhaps I digress.

During last year's SNL TV season, as well as during the TV season the year before, every single Saturday Night Live included references to sketch ideas I had submitted for each show. I submitted my ideas to two very SNL-connected movie producers, who I had first met well before they were big producers, Sean Daniel and Stuart Cornfeld, and each idea found its way, in some miniscule form, to the show for which it was intended. The exception was the show for which I intended my sketch idea, "In Orders We Trust":

http://www.angelfire.com/blog2/jonathandsteinhoff/page15.html

I later found what I consider to be the explanation: someone later wrote a book based on that sketch idea of mine, then sold it to Stuart Cornfeld's company, Red Hour, for development as a TV show. My surmisal is that a few extra steps were taken to bury Red Hour's association with my idea, by not forwarding my idea to SNL. I also wonder if an inclination to bury this trail is responsible for their having ceased to open my emails (according to my email opening detection technology, they stopped reading my emails in May, although there are also ways to avoid detection with this particular technology).

The season premier of SNL on September 13, 2008 reinforces what is indicated by the email opening detection technology: they did not include in any form my sketch idea for a show for the first time in two years (not counting the exception I've noted here).

The comedy sketch idea I submitted for September 13th, entitled "Beaver And Wally, The Flying Invisible Time Travelers", can be read at:

http://www.archive.org/details/BeaverAndWallyTheFlyingInvisibleTimeTravelers

And so, now my idea for how Paul McCartney can go about making known his suport of Obama. Obama was initially going to appear on the September 13th season premier of SNL, however, he changed his mind because Hurricane Ike was going on, and so it was deemed inappropriate for him to make an appearance on SNL at this time. When he does appear on SNL, Paul McCartney can make a surprise appearance on the same show. He can play Ward Cleaver in my above-referenced sketch idea - the role would work because it is so opposite to how one sees Paul McCartney, unless one imagines that aging has transformed him into a calm, pipe-smoking, paternal figure (that reminds me of the time I provided him with something he used on the opening track on "Flaming Pie", but that's another story).

At the end of the show in which Paul and Barrack appear, as everyone who appeared that night stands together on the stage, Paul uses hand gestures we've seen him use before with perfect finesse: Paul pats Barrack on the back, smiles at the audience, and while pointing at Barrack, does a "thumbs up" and head nod. It will unmistakably communicate an endorsement; it will avoid doing so in a stiff, excessively self-important manner; it will be rebroadcast on news shows everywhere so it won't matter how many people stay up to watch the last moment of the show. The coolness of the manner of endorsement will electrify it. The only thing wrong with the idea is that it could be traced back to this blog. Well, that's life when you're trying to save the world.