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.

I Read The Clues Today

When I saw the following bit on the March 16th Daily Show I immediately thought of Mind Helmets:



While I was attending my last two years of high school in New York City from 1971 to 1973 at a small school called Elisabeth Irwin High School, I wrote something for a creative writing assignment. It was a make-believe newspaper editorial, addressing a future world where superstition/paganism had taken over. In this world, technology was as sophisticated as could be imagined, but most people called it magic. The editorial defended the unpopular idea that, though some called it magic, those new things everyone was talking about, Mind Helmets, might actually be a product of science.

Over time I have accumulated good reason to believe that, contrary to the official version of how it came about, this story of mine had a lot to do with the creation of “Mind Games,” the title song of the John Lennon album that followed “Imagine”. Both this story and “Steinhoff’s Monster”, a 16mm film I started on at CalArts in 1973. There were people at my very small (25 boys, 25 girls in my grade) high school who would go to Lennon's secret Bank Street home after school, having met Lennon through a mutual friend of Lennon's, David Peel (in 1974 I would work for Howard Smith, the person who introduced Lennon to Peel). I was actually told that this story of mine would appear in the 1973 school yearbook, though it was pulled at the last minute.

Two things happened during the afternoon of March 16th prior to the Daily Show videoclip included here:

• I received an emailed Facebook communication from someone I hadn’t heard from since the early ‘70s, a person I knew at Elisabeth Irwin
• The Mind of Natasha Richardson, whose husband, Liam Neeson, is working with Steven Spielberg on a movie about Lincoln, was damaged, presumably because she skied without a Helmet.

My March 13th blog was about the murder of Princess Diana, how it existed in relation to the murder of the mother of the Duchess of York a year later. How things were specially "left on my doorstep" in relation to those deaths prior to their occurrence. In that March 13th blog I went into why I believe my "doorstep" has been selected to receive special clues regarding matters of such importance: the fact that I am secretly important in relation to Spielberg and McCartney, and am thusly perceived as a gateway to special attention. I brought forward in that blog one and only one clue that any law enforcement agent could easily follow up on: a license plate that read, “Zig Ski”. I suppose “Zig Ski” could suggest the idea of zig-zagging while skiing, though I referred to it in a different context.

What might have been prevented, what can still be prevented, what exactly is at stake, I feel very much in the dark here. What is it that someone wants us to see, what guilt would they wish to assign, that may be more apparent. Oh, if only I hadn't printed the words, "Zig Ski". And oh, do no such thing again. Perhaps this is like some poker game, where a player would seek to bluff us into believing that "Zig Ski" is/remains a great clue, when it is in fact an easy opportunity to mislead. The driver of the "Zig Ski" car may have innocently done nothing more than drive from Point A to Point B on cue, expecting he was enroute to seeing the Martians land or Ringo Starr dancing the cha-cha-cha. But who cued him? Can it lead back to a more genuine clue?

Could this be an effort to guilt Spielberg for the death of Richardson, because I had to divulge the clue in a blog instead of being able to provide it directly to someone who would follow-up? Someone who would follow-up, because they would accept that I am secretly important and would thusly be more likely to receive such a clue "on my doorstep"? Could dumping guilt on people like Spielberg and McCartney be the kind of thing an enemy of the Western world would endeavor to accomplish, with me as their pawn? As for me, I recognize how complex issues might surround matters of this kind in ways beyond that which I presently know of, thus justifying a decision by Spielberg and McCartney to avoid publicizing my importance. As I lead a far more reclusive existence than most, it could seem to people like Spielberg and McCartney that I am far more vulnerable.

I do not let the kind of sick people who would kill Princess Diana and Natasha Richardson direct my mind in how to look at these things. I read the news today, but I did not see the same thing as everyone else in so doing.

And finally, I've written another sketch comedy idea, "Timeout", available at archive.org. I hope you see something good in it.

The Illustrated Story of Sting’s “BRAND NEW DAY”

In 1998 I made a little sci-fi comedy video, “Gosk, Part 2” (sequel to my 1994 Gosk, Part 1) (http://www.archive.org/details/JonathanDavidSteinhoff_3), starring someone who was Joni Mitchell’s friend and artistic director of the album artwork on a number of her recordings. At this time I had long been a secret major influence on the work of a great number of major recording artists (and others of great importance in the entertainment industry), including Paul McCartney, John Lennon, The Rolling Stones, Madonna, and many others.

Remembering an interview John Lennon had once given in which he described the creation of “Give Peace A Chance” as a deliberate effort to provide a rallying anthem, and having secretly contributed the opening to John Lennon’s song, “Starting Over” (“Our life together is so precious together, etc.”), I was inspired to create a song about someone trying to rally everyone, “Brand New River of Love” (copyright January 1999 as part of my music CD, “Still Around”) (http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=366981&content=songinfo&songID=2724662).

When the Joni Mitchell art director asked if he could have a copy of the song used for the opening credit sequence of “Gosk” (a scratchy Xavier Cugat song slowed down from 78 to 33) (http://www.archive.org/details/JonathanDSteinhoff), I put it on a ten-minute cassette, and for the flipside included my then work-in-progress, a (more uptempo, upbeat) version of “Brand New River of Love”.

James Taylor, one-time boyfriend of Joni Mitchell and very special guest (above all other guests) at an A&E television concert of people rendering Joni Mitchell songs, appears on the 1999 Sting music CD, “Brand New Day”. I surmise that it was via Taylor that Sting experienced “Brand New River of Love”, however, because of my secret importance to the work of so many, it is also possible that it reached Sting in some other way. There can be no doubt that my song led to the Sting song. Nor can there be any doubt that the crying saxophone in my song inspired the crying harmonica in Stevie Wonder’s accompaniment to Sting’s song.

Because Joni Mitchell’s art director also ran a videotape editing and copying business, and because I occasionally created music videos that I needed copied, copies of my videotapes were made by Joni Mitchell’s art director. From certain Sting product that followed, it became abundantly clear that Sting continued to use me as an influence. Though some instances of usage might in and of themselves contain no such implication, the cumulative implication is plain to see (please note: the document this link takes you to begins with this same text found here, but also goes on to include samples of works to illustrate the point).

How McCartney Can Solve The Whole iTunes Puzzle

We all know the story of King Solomon and how two women each claimed a baby to be theirs. How King Solomon, to determine the identity of the true mother, said he would therefore cut the baby in two and give each woman half. How this was intended to provoke the true mother to change her story and deny that the baby was hers. How this would reveal the true mother, who would be willing to give her baby to the other woman, if this was the only way to keep her baby from being cut in half.

This does not perfectly correlate to my solution to a problem currently faced by Paul McCartney regarding Beatles songs and iTunes, nevertheless, follow me, or Paul McCartney, follow me.

If Beatles songs become available on iTunes in the normal manner, what will happen to the artistic wholeness of Beatles albums? The songs on Beatle albums are not just packaged together as so much Beatles product; and Beatles albums are not merely artifacts of ways in which the songs were once packaged. They are artistic creations.

To strengthen the glue that holds these songs together as parts of specific Beatles albums, after the songs have been released into an iTunes song - at - a - time world, it may require more than a money incentive approach, a cheaper - by - the - dozen/ cheaper - if - you - get- all - of - the - songs - on - a - particular - Beatles - album approach.

I have an unusual plan for eliciting appropriate respect among the masses for the artistic wholeness that the Beatles albums possess. I do not know if Paul McCartney or iTunes are ready for my idea - in fact, I'm sure there are those for whom even the King Solomon story is considered profane (try pitching a movie where a major moment involves the idea of sawing a baby in half).

Sell Beatle songs on iTunes by the half-song. Each half-song would cost half as much as the whole song. From this there would emerge an ethic, a mentality of "You only bought half of that Beatles song???!!! What a ___ you are!" Song samples are one thing, where you know you aren't legitimately experiencing the entire work, but the idea of Beatles half-songs will touch so deep a nerve, provoke so extreme a reaction from those who respect the artistic wholeness of the entire Beatles song, that this disposition would emerge as a basic ethic. People would inwardly rejoice when they learn that, despite the option of purchasing half-songs, invariably the same number of both halves (i.e., whole songs) would be purchased (this is my prediction, as is the idea that this statistic would receive much attention).

I believe this new, basic ethic would have a ripple effect, reinforcing the glue holding together the sense that these songs are parts of whole Beatles albums. It could even become the foundation of a more widespread respect for artistic autonomy.

I Now Pronounce This Ring Open

On October 1st my blog asked that Paul McCartney and Denny Laine (McCartney’s main musical collaborator after John Lennon) reunite for Billy Joel's and Bruce Springsteen’s concert for Obama on October 16th, which was to be (and was) attended by Obama. The day following my blog, October 2nd, the “What Goes On” Beatles website carried an article about an October 11th Denny Laine concert. That article offered several email addresses that might easily lead to Denny Laine, and so, being handed this the day after my Denny Laine blog, I emailed several people, under the Subject line, “Laine Help In A Specific Way,” a paraphrase of the line from the title song of the Beatles movie, “Help”: “I never needed anybody’s Help In Any Way.”

At the October 16th Billy Joel/Bruce Springsteen concert for Obama, according to an Associated Press article, Laine and McCartney did not appear. The article did not state this specifically, however, we will assume that it would have mentioned this had it occurred. Okay, I can see that.

What the article also did was to mention the fact that Billy Joel played the title song from the Beatles movie, “A Hard Days Night”. The Beatles have created a substantial number of songs. I therefore find it noteworthy that from all of the Beatles material to draw from (or not), I referred to the title song of one of the two Beatles movies in my efforts to make something happen at that October 16th concert, and the title song from the other Beatles movie was in actuality performed at that same concert.

This is far from the first time I had an influence on Billy Joel, who once sat next to me on an airplane in 1978, several weeks before Paul McCartney sent me a letter, which was several weeks before I graduated from CalArts.

Changing the subject, but remaining on a related topic, some may have noticed that my September 28th blog announced a new Saturday Night Live sketch idea of mine, “Peek-A-Boo, ICU”, including a link to where one could read it. This is also evidence of when I wrote it, because archive.org indicates, in a non-transmutable way, the date when things are posted there. My sketch was about the then upcoming presidential debate hosted by Tom Brokaw, and more specifically, about people’s views being blocked. In the actual debate, McCain’s actual blocking of Brokaw’s actual view became the actual source of much actual humor. Nor was this the first time McCain helped himself to my material, his last appearance on The Daily Show being another example. Are you ready to consider that it was deliberate when McCain blocked Brokaw's view? Okay, well I can appreciate how difficult it must be to accept the idea that at times my influence, at least on a certain, secret track, should be as powerful as, say, Paul McCartney’s. As for me, I've been seeing the extent of my influence in an unobstructed way for most of my life.

"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.