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).

The Price Of Freedom, And The Free Of Pricedom

Once again, more stuff little and great, all worth reporting to someone or another!

In addition to my Weekly Monk/Steinhoff Videoclip, this time I made an additional, separate videoclip that involves this week's "Monk" episode, as it also involves not only an episode of "Medium" that aired the same night (a TV show that has begun regularly interconnecting with the Monk/Steinhoff Videoclip - see the last few Monk/Steinhoff Videoclip installments), but pertains primarily to one of my potential terrorist clues (described in my March 13, 2009 blog) as well, and only threads through me/my material in that connection.

You will also find stuff in this blog edition not connected to "Monk" - so in other words, a little bit of everything!

Weekly MONK/STEINHOFF VIDEOCLIP, 11.6.09
This time around I'm back to being able to provide in my weekly Monk/Steinhoff videoclip things verifiable, in terms of referencing things I unalterably timestamp-posted a while back, "Gosk Part 1" and "Gosk Part 2" . As always, appreciating this Monk/Steinhoff Videoclip's significance requires seeing it in the context of (just about) every episode of "Monk" ever made containing things that connect to me/my material (most of which is similarly verifiable through unalterable timestamp postings). This context generates a perspective based on the necessary cumulative information.



Potential Terrorist Clues Left On The Doorstep Of Someone Secretly Super-Important In Relation To Steven Spielberg And Paul McCartney Corner
As you can see, I've come up with the perfect title for this section of my blog, sort of like, "Johnny's Corner", only with more words. I will use this section title in the future on those occasions when I choose to include something on this subject in my blog. For those particularly slow to figure things out, I am the "Someone" referred to in the section title.



My Potentially Imaginary "Friends"
On my way to work on Thursday, November 5th, in the same approximate spot as where I believe I spotted Jennifer Aniston several weeks ago, which I describe in my October 25, 2009 blog as something to be seen in a very specified context, I believe I may have spotted her BFF Courteney Cox Arquette (wearing sunglasses). I therefore looked to see if this related to that night's "Office" episode (as the previously described specified context implied it might), and sure enough, though not indicated ahead of time in any blurb on that episode that I saw, the episode had Michael backing out of his relationship with Pam's mother once he learns she is 58 years old. This can clearly be seen as a twist on the premise of Courteney's TV show, "Couger Town". Additionally, on Friday, November 6th, I thought I may have again seen Matthew Perry, this time in a sports car with the top down. If so, this relates to something I wrote regarding the last time I saw Matthew Perry (again, my 10.25.09 blog), which I also relate to as something that occurred in a specified context. At that time I wrote of my "Curb Your Enthusiasm" suggestion in which Larry David keeps running into "Friends" cast members individually by chance, while planning the "Seinfeld" reunion show. I have Perry complaining to David that he is battling his girlfriend to tint the windows of his sports car. This contrasts with the possible subsequent Perry siting in which his sports car has the top down (I never looked too directly at the possible Matthew Perry person, though I'm quite sure that whoever it was, unlike the possible Courteney Cox Arquette person, he was without sunglasses).

Take Out Some Insurance On Me, Baby (Sung To The Tune Of "Take Out Some Insurance On Me, Baby")
On Thursday, November 5th I commented on a HuffingtonPost article (as JonathanDS2U), with the suggestion that Wellpoint Insurance be dealt with harshly for Senator Bayh initially threatening to join Lieberman's pro-fillibuster against healthcare stance. Bayh's wife is on Wellpoint's board, and I expressed my belief that Bayh only backed down because the obvious corruptness of the reason behind his taking this stance would ultimately cause it to backfire. On Friday, November 6th there was a big trailer in front of my apartment house, suggesting they were shooting a film. I asked someone there, and was informed they had been making a commercial for Hartford Insurance.

Bunch Of Knuckleheads
Back during the three-year period when I would every week email a sketch idea for SNL to people I once knew (Sean Daniel and Stuart Cornfeld), because every week little fragments (sometimes big fragments) from my idea would wind up on that week's show without fail, I perceived that the very first "Scared Straight" sketch originated from the idea I had sent in that week. I am referring to the SNL sketches where an inmate (Kenan Thompson) is brought in to a room where several delinquent teenagers are being detained after having been caught for some misdeed, so that he can lecture to them on the consequences of delinquent behavior, by painting a picture of prison life. I now present to you my Bowery Boys sketch comedy idea, emailed by me on May 5, 2008, several days before the first "Scared Straight" sketch occurred (I know the "Scared Straight" delinquent characters are technically not the Bowery Boys - however, if you recall, I did say fragments of my ideas):

The Bowery Boys are a few years older, and are they ever angry. They’re in court, suing and counter-suing each other for defamation of character owing to things said back when they were a gang. So Slip dared to call Zatch a knucklehead? So Zatch dared to imply Whitey had a screw loose? Zatch may have expressed it in pantomime, using sign language when Whitey wasn’t looking to indicate Whitey was crazy, “but yer honor, ain’t it the same ting?” “Oh yeah, you lousy, why I oughta-“ “You hear dat, yer honor, he’s doing it again!” “I did not, I said ‘you lousy’, but I didn’t finish the sentence. I coulda, but I am too refined.” “Yeah, too refined.” “Did you hear that, your honor? He was sarcastic about the idea of me being refined. I’ve never been so insulted.” In the end, the judge decrees that each owes money to the others, but when totalled up, all break even except Slip, who comes out three dollars ahead. He calls them all jerks in his delight, and so is made to give up the three dollars as a result.

The November 7, 2009 SNL included another installment of "Scared Straight", complete with Kenan Thompson being caught at reciting movie plots that he tries to pass off as actual things he's personally encountered. This tends to remind me of an experience I had wherein, once the movie "The Front" came out, I could no longer tell one of my (up until then) oft-repeated stories.

Way back when, my mother was in the Communist Party with Zero Mostel before he was famous (when he was Sammy Mostel). My mother described to me how she had signed up with the Communist Party under the phony last name of "Brown", as everyone used phony names, for the Communist Party tended to never let people quit. In the movie, "The Front", Zero Mostel, playing a character named Hecky Brown, protects at all costs the name of the woman he was once in the Communist Party with, and eventually kills himself when he is destroyed for this. Mostel was in fact blacklisted as a Communist, and once when it was arranged that my family could meet him after attending a performance of "Fiddler On The Roof", Mostel said, "Ah, Rose ___ (her maiden name). My mother's friend, Phil Gordis (a star of my Dostoyevsky video), also corroborated their all being in the Communist Party together, back in the days when such a choice actually reflected a certain idealistic take on the concept of communism with a small "c" rather than a disposition toward Stalinism (interestingly, Phil also described knowing the person who introduced Trotsky to the person who used this access to assassinate Trotsky). Josh Mostel, Zero's son, once denied to me that his father was a Communist, and said I should have my mother contact him if she insisted this was the case.

My big point here is that, once they made the movie, "The Front", it seemed that for me to repeat this story of mine was to appear to be reciting something connected to a movie plot. Similarly, the November 6th "Monk" included a story I've told from time to time that I don't believe I will any longer be able to (perhaps no great loss):

A long time ago, my family was good friends with the family of a Senior Editor of Consumer Reports Magazine, Bob Klein, who went on to become the Senior Editor of Money Magazine. While our two families were on a joint vacation together in Welfleet (Cape Cod), one day I went with the Kleins on some deep sea fishing outing. I got sea sick and had to go into a cabin on the boat, however, they left my line in the water, and when I returned to it there was a nice sized sea bass on the end. On shore, Bob Klein was about to sell the fish to someone on shore who made an offer (this was before he was made Senior Editor of Money). I had to be extremely firm in my refusal to do so, insisting that it was my private property even though I had gotten sea sick and was in a cabin on the boat at the moment the sea bass was making his decision to eat from my fishing hook.

An incident on the November 6th "Monk" has a kid absolutely refusing to sell a fish he caught, as he is proud of it, which strikes Monk as a somewhat silly position. It's unfortunate in a way, as I thought of my sea bass story as containing a special meaning regarding the subject of private property, especially as Bob went on to become Mr. Money (a societal bastion of the concept of private property). Yet I am pleased to give this story away, if I have indeed correctly surmised some of the cause and effect of the matter.

Apple Pie Squared

"Evaporating Ink", Chapter 20 I Think (Thought I'd Written It Down)
Once again I only have things to blog for those who already appreciate that I don't make things up - there is no particular proof, not this time. Those who saw my October 25th blog's posting of my October 23rd Monk/Steinhoff Videoclip prior to October 30th will know that it was in fact created prior to the October 30th "Monk". However, skeptics have available to them the conjecture that I had inside word on what one would find in the October 30th "Monk", and so I could conceivably have conjured up something October 25th that would connect. There is no connection here to anything of mine that was unalterably timestamp posted some time ago (this blogsite's timestamp posting is malleable), so, no proof. However, once again, I point out that there exists, among my various blogs and elsewhere, proof for any intelligent person that I am indeed the point from which quite a bit of no small significance springboards. And so I really don't feel I am making too great a demand here to ask that I be taken at my word.

Regifting
I have previously referred to how every time Regis is on Letterman they work in inside-references to a woman I once worked with who Regis once introduced himself to in a restaurant, references that connect to me and the few things I ever had to do with her. Apparently I was mistaken in believing that Regis' first appearance on Letterman following the Letterman headlines about Dave in relation to his co-workers would be super big, though one might understand why they would choose not to play up that significance to this Regis appearance. Although: a show that often refers to my material, "Smallville" (a TV show referred to in a number of previous blogs), did in fact, on the very same night (Oct. 30th) as this Regis appearance, contain a plotline about Lois and Clark being morning show hosts. Regis and Kelly were actually mentioned by name last night on "Smallville". This is not something that happens every day.

I am reluctant to detail specifically how they made their inside-reference to this former co-worker of mine during Regis' appearance on Letterman, but as one might expect, at least one familiar with my secret importance, this time around they made it very difficult for me to be so non-specific. They went to quite a great length, which makes my silence considerably more pronounced. And so, out of what is likely a misplaced belief that, when something makes the headlines as big as did the Letterman and co-workers episode, and then the all-important Regis appearance on Letterman (eventually) follows, and it drags me in the way they have, perhaps the social contract entitles the world to stare at me out of the corner of its eye until I come forward and explain what they did there.

One of the times that this woman left my company to go on maternity leave, back in the '80s, someone gave her a dark blue dress as a going-away gift. Everyone who was on Letterman last night, the night of Regis' appearance, with the singular EXCEPTION of Regis, wore an identical dark blue snuggy dress (or whatever it's called) that brought this same dark blue dress very much to (my) mind. However, back when she and I were co-workers, at one point when I pointed out that she was wearing the dark blue dress that a certain person had given her, she denied that she had ever been given it by him. This must certainly leave me not knowing what to believe, or not.

And this is where "Smallville" comes in. This woman had once given me to understand that a person whose name I came across in a book about George Washington (found in a used bookstore/map store half a block from where we worked, and so perhaps something planted in my path), someone of importance in the sphere of Washington, with the same last name as hers, was the brother of her ancestor. She described to me how her mother had wanted her to follow-up and research this brother of her ancestor in the New York Public Library. She even wore white stockings to work sometimes. It was this ancestor of hers who first crossed the ocean from England to America (an action which I expect one is more likely to take when one's brother is hanging out with George Washington). I found this all quite fascinating, especially in light of my secret importance in relation to four of England's most important citizens (The Beatles).

When I offered her the book as my going-away gift for her maternity leave, she said it was too much. I was only able to persuade her to accept pages I tore out from the book that related to the brother of her ancestor, but not the entire book. What's a few pages? And so, I connect to what happened last night on Letterman regarding the blue dress gift, at least in my mind, an incident on last night's "Smallville": Oliver wishes to present a woman with a gift, however, she refuses it.


Weekly MONK/STEINHOFF VIDEOCLIP, 10.30.09
There are two things I would add regarding this week's Monk/Steinhoff Videoclip. Three, from a certain point of view, but I promise, two or three, it will not change the number of pages of this blog, even if I have to condense everything to achieve it:

• I have not included in the videoclip yet another reference by "Monk" to something that relates to inside-word pertaining to one of the potential terrorist clues I've previously blogged about (something relating to a Tim Robbins movie). I again choose not to go into further detail. I also noticed a car's license plate on my way home from work earlier that same day (well before the episode aired) that also tied in with an aspect of this same potential clue (the same aspect, in a certain sense), though there was nothing to suggest that whoever dispatched the car attached to this license plate had any kind of inside information on terrorist activity. Rather, it showed they had done a degree of follow-up regarding something to which I had only alluded.
  

• I have the feeling from certain things that occurred on "Monk" this week, and on the new "Monk" "tie-in" show, "Medium", and also from the trailer for next week's "Monk", that the Dockert character from my "Gosk" video is likely to come up in some inside-reference manner on the November 6th show(s).

Balcony Scene
After that stuff in my October 25th blog about Jennifer Aniston in relation to stuff she "laid at my doorstep" regarding people and their affairs with other people's parents, I was anticipating some follow-up when her good friend Courteney Cox Arquette appeared on Letterman this past week (it's the type of thing I've come to expect). All I saw was David Letterman climbing a ladder to the balcony so that he could give Ms. Arquette's mother some flowers for her birthday.

This is not something that can be construed as an affair with somebody's parent, try as we may. Perhaps things would have worked out differently had they placed Ms. Arquette's mother in the mezzanine (we can only imagine the possible scenario that might then have resulted, and personally, I am shocked just to think about it).


What's All This I Keep Hearing About Violins On Television
Not too long ago I was speaking with someone at work and found myself using the word "diddling". Suddenly feeling that I might be in danger of being reprimanded down the road for using a word synonymous with the "f" word (you don't know how careful some of us have to be), I quickly changed it to "diddling around" instead of just "diddling". Whew, nice save. There was probably no danger at any point anyway.

The next day occurred the usage by former Vice President Cheney of the word, "dithering", followed by much repetition and discussion by the media concerning his use of this word. If one is aware of the degree to which former President Bush has made inside-references to things that originated with me, one would perhaps appreciate why I now wish I hadn't come anywhere near "diddling". I am a million times more an Obama person than a Republican (though I cannot say that where I work there are no Republicans to be found diddling around).


I Know It Happened But I Won't Later Dept.
On the same night that Jon Stewart on "The Daily Show" (a show that has been known to be influenced by me in a big way) said something that could conceivably have brought to mind my video, "Bishop And Pawn Forfeit Rule", the Jimmy Fallon Show, with help from Tim Robbins' wife, Susan Sarandon, also, in a different manner, did something that brought to (my) mind that same video of mine. Stewart spoke of going back in time and killing Afghanistan before he could create the country Afghanistan, and Sarandon gave Jimmy Fallon a ping pong paddle so small that it turned his great ping pong expertise to naught. Both on the same night! That has to be worth at least four points.

The Fireman Theory, or Cheerio

In the past few weeks there has been quite a set of things hurling me into the center of it all sort of kind of, not one of which do I care to discuss at this time, and so on to other matters.

Sir Paul McCartney has an unknown (Whatever that word means: if 500 people know something that no one else knows are they outnumbered, thereby not knowing? Or if 501 people disagree, believing that the thing cannot actually be said to be known, do they win?) history of doing things of secret significance when it comes to me. The absurd/crazy sound of that has played no small part in maintaining the unknown-ness of these actions.

For me to continue from my McCartney premise, it would therefore seem that I must throw the pupils in my Beginners class to the side of the road. I will then ask the people in my Intermediate class to keep them company, patch up their bruises (we were traveling at about 40 mph when we threw the Beginners class to the side of the road, so I expect there to be some bruises, not to mention screams of "Lunatic!" that I would rather not hear. Have you Intermediates any gags on you?). And so on this one I can only proceed with my Advanced class.

Now this is just a theory, based on tendencies and facts:

When I did the title song of my "The Gravity" CD in 2002 (not to be confused with my "Gravity" cassette from the late '80s, early '90s, different song, different stage of my musical development), and I made reference to the breakfast cereal Cheerios, ("I just want to go out into that world that I used to see on my box of Cheerios when I was young"), I knew something would be made of it by the Cheerios people. I did not include a reference to Cheerios for that reason, however, my experience informed me that there was an excellent chance it would get picked up on in some way by Cheerios. Sure enough, Cheerios shortly thereafter did a TV commercial of two trucks, one carrying Cheerios and the other carrying their new thing to combine with Cheerios. Now before the Beginners class insists there is nothing contained in this fact (I know you Beginners are still there), I hasten to describe how I had once created a thing where there was a lobster truck and a spilled truck with butter. I was sure to see in the Cheerios commercial an idea I had used, and though others might have independently come up with the same idea, how is it that it was Cheerios, which I already expected to do something. In addition to this, Cheerios did another TV commercial where a little boy refers to his heart as making a "clerp" sound. Clerp is the name of one of the central characters in my "Gosk" videos. And let us not forget the scene (though we may try) in "Ready To Rumble", where a truck carrying toilet paper collides with a truck carrying filled port-o-johns. David Arquette, the star of "Ready To Rumble", is part of a group that includes a star of my "Gosk" video, Robbie, who at one point was also going to star Rosanna Arquette in his Anita O'Day movie (he ended up doing an Anita O'Day documentary instead, starring Anita O'Day). Robbie also once introduced me to David Arquette's assistant, Whitney. Paul McCartney, it has been well publicized, is a good friend of Rosanna Arquette (particularly publicized after his split from Heather Mills, in fact, Rosanna Arquette was one of the only names associated with McCartney in the media during that period). Those who accept these facts as known may or may not feel inclined to allow me to do a tad less hastening in my explanation, yet the rest, well, they like to make me hasten. I must hasten to add this, hasten to add that, not fair, really.

Paul McCartney's newest release is "Electric Arguments" by The Fireman (a two-man group, McCartney and Youth), due out in a day or two. Based on the above-referenced unknown history of Paul McCartney, I had to see if there was anything of mine to correlate with his new CD (one can hear it on MySpace, courtesy of McCartney, and view the cover all over the place). All that I could come up with was a correlation between his "The Fireman" CD cover and my "The Gravity" CD video cover (see images above). Now anyone in the world could win the argument that for two people to each draw a circle does not imply a relationship. An intelligent person would be required to defend that, depending on the specific context, such an implication certainly could exist. Even half-circles, even quarter circles, even a one-inch line. Context is everything.

When I think of the name, "The Fireman", I hear a few possible things, one of which is what I heard repeated throughout this week's "Life On Mars" TV episode: the cliche of what a kid (Youth?) wants to be when he grows up - a fireman. On "Life On Mars" the kid wanted to be an astronaut or a policeman, but it comes to the same thing. This is the week of the new Fireman release, and in that cliche of wanting to be a fireman, I also hear the line from my "The Gravity": "I just want to go out into that world that I used to see on my box of Cheerios when I was young". A child's perspective on the world and one's future place in the world.

So this is my theory of where McCartney might be pointing. And if he is, because I am only 78% certain, it isn't something my Beginners or even my Intermediates can accept. And if you lousy Beginners and Intermediates think I leave it to you to tell me my true role in the world, you'd better finish your Wheaties.