Leno in prime time

Jay Leno’s new show began on NBC last night. There has been a lot of ballyhoo about the network’s decision to have one hour each weeknight given to the same program. Nobody has done so for as long as anybody cares to remember. Fox doesn’t even try to program that 9 o'clock hour.

Critics seem to be panning the show. I admit that I was not especially impressed. I liked the old show, and this was like the Tonight Show with the desk gone and the sequence moved a bout, but I guess I was looking for something with more splash for a grand opening. However, considering how much money Leno made for NBC with the Tonight Show even after he found out he was going to be tossed into the Burbank landfill, it certainly seems in order that NBC give him time to develop something that works. Besides, it seems quite likely that whether the critics like the product or not that it may be a money maker. Overhead is lower for that type of program than it is for the blood and/or guts and/or tears programming that usually inhabits that hour. Networks worry about appealing to too many people past prime demographic age and/or little disposable income, i.e., people like me, but that is the demographic which is most likely to take its entertainment from broadcast television.

I think he could have done better by scratching Kanye West after the incident Sunday evening. That would have showed an attempt to not reward offensiveness, but Leno has never pretended that he is in the running for sainthood, so I don’t know that there is anything surprising that he did not.

Anyhow, it could be interesting late prime time entertainment for quite a while.

Bad advertising:

The Golden Gopher football team are opening the season with a game in the un-air-conditioned Carrier Dome in Syracuse.

Mother’s maiden name

I recently read of Sephardic Jews being discriminated against by Ashkenazim at a school by asking for [among other things] an applicant’s mother’s maiden name” on the application form.

Invidious distinction and discrimination are nothing new, folks.

We see this question frequently. It has been [and often still is] on web registrations, bank forms, job applications, and a lot of other things.

Exactly where it came from has been subject to speculation. I remember reading a few decades ago that it was devised by Boston Brahmins so that they would not find themselves hiring Irish or allowing them into their neighborhoods or clubs or whatever. A person might have what seems like a seemingly respectable English name such as “Cabot” or “Saltonstall” but you never knew whether there might not be an “O’Brien” hiding in the family tree. Later, it seems that the question helped people of Northern and Western European stock make sure that there was not a “Jaworski,” “Stephanopoulos,” “Antonelli,” or “Habib” in there.

Whatever the origin, the question does seem to have been used for that effect for many decades. [Old timers might recall it being used in a “Route 66” episode for that purpose when the heroes ran into an American “patriot” who was decrying the number of outisders [non-WASP people] infiltrating the true America.] As national origin started to become grounds on which discrimination could no longer be based and enforcement started, managers and creditors and clubmasters and others still had stacks of forms and wanted to keep using them, so they invented other rationale for having the question.

“Security” was given as one reason. This was, they said, to make sure that John Jacob Smith whose mother was named Jones was not confused with John Jacob Smith whose mother was named Johnson.

I have known the mother’s maiden name of many people, some of whom I have never met. [Quick quiz: What were the mothers’ maiden names of Presidents Franklin Delano Roosevelt, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, Lyndon Baines Johnson, Richard Milhous Nixon, or George Herbert Walker Bush? It should not take a lot of guessing. And I never met any of them.]

I know the maiden names of the mothers of many people I grew up with because I knew their extended families [or at least enough about them] to figure it out and I have picked up more as I have gone along. After all, it really is not secret. And, since unfortunately, there are many cases of people trying to steal identities of people in their immediate or extended family that information serves as no protection whatever.

I have seen some suggestions on how to confound the people asking. Spell it backwards, use a grandmother’s instead, just make one up. None of these seems really secure, either because somebody else could still find it or you might forget it yourself.

A simpler suggestion: IF WE JUST QUIT ASKING THE QUESTION, WE WOULDN’T NEED ANY ANSWERS. AND IF WE ALL LEFT THE ANSWER SPACE BLANK, MAYBE WE COULD SCREW UP THE WHOLE SYSTEM.

I understand that there are probably times/places where the question may serve a valid purpose, such in official government vital statistics places.

I would be interested in hearing anybody else’s history with this question.

Notes on No. 756 plus two years

Two years ago today Barry Bonds hit home run number 756.

Has it only been two years? It seems that both the game and society have moved so much past him so quickly.

Selig and the MLB honchos made good money on the home run derbies of the late 20^th and early 21^st century and then became so righteous as more news of steroids and perhaps juiced balls became more common.

Now the writers who used the stories to keep baseball in the news and beat writers and commentators employed will arrange to keep him away from Cooperstown forever (or at least a long time).

While some of these people want to put Pete Rose there, a man who bet on a team he was managing, they get so outraged about a man who cheated only in order to improve performance. They even seem to keep putting pressure on the Commissioner’s office to re-admit Rose even though it is Cooperstown’s rule, not MLB’s rule which keeps Rose out.

They will probably win on the Rose matter sooner or later.

And maybe the relative quiet with which Bonds and number 756 have disappeared from our consciousness is a good sign that his feat was ephemeral and had only of momentary significance derived from his perceived, non-sanctioned (at least officially) use of steroids is really in order.

Lizie Borden took an ax

Today, August 4, is the anniversary of the death of Lizzie Borden’s father and step-mother. [If you have never heard of the incident – and I didn’t until I was grown – and have missed the resultant doggerel (below), it was big news in 1892.]

In the mid-1990s I heard a similar piece of doggerel (also below) about a Mr. O. J. Simpson who was also accused and later acquitted of a highly-publicized double murder.

Both of these bits of verse have historical errors [e.g, there is no proof of the death order of the Bordens and it was never confirmed that there was anything other than a eater-waiter relationship between O.J.’s ex and Ronald Goldman] and the latter does not seem to have lasted in the public memory, but likely the memory of the crimes for which both were acquitted will linger for some time.

Lizzie Borden took an axe

And gave her mother forty whacks.

When she saw what she had done

She gave her father forty-one

O.J. Simpson took a knife

And hacked away his ex-wife’s life

When he saw what he could do

He butchered up her boyfriend too.

Jane Hathaway obit

Jane Hathaway, foundation director, condor advocate,
figured in Commerce Bank scandal

LOS ANGELES [October 18. 1998]

Jane Hathaway, the bank secretary at Beverly Hills’ Commerce Bank who first came to public attention by testifying against and helping convict her boss in the 1972 California Dream banking scandal, died in a Los Angeles nursing home Sunday of complications from cancer at the age of 71.

Hathaway helped convict her long-time boss Milburn Drysdale after his California Dream Landscapes Finance Company and related ventures were revealed as little more than a complicated Ponzi scheme based on fraudulent premises which Drysdale and associates helped devise. She later became an advocate for preserving the California condor also twice sought election as a Republican to the California Assembly.

She was originally a co-defendant with Drysdale, but her attorneys were able to obtain separate trials and won her acquittal. The testimony revealed in her trial helped lead to more charges against Drysdale who was eventually convicted of 27 charges and sentenced to 45 years in prison. Drysdale died at the federal prison in Leavenworth, Kansas in 1977.

After unsuccessful campaigns for the California legislature in 1976 and 1978, Hathaway went to work in 1980 as Executive Director for the Daisy Moses Foundation, which had been founded by J. D. Clampett, the oil mogul who was Drysdale’s primary victim. Clampett, who lost an estimated $30 million and control of Mammoth Pictures as a result of Drysdale’s crimes, had said he never believed Hathaway guilty at all and paid for her “dream team” defense. Hathaway left the Moses Foundation in 1988 to become director of Biddle Bird Watchers Society. Elly May Clampett, J. D. Clampett’s daughter and granddaughter of Daisy Moses, replaced her at the Moses Foundation.

She met the late P. Casper Biddle, the famed condor advocate and founder of Biddle Bird Watchers in the early 1960’s and became a devoted follower. She left the Biddle Bird Watchers after events following Biddle’s 1993 death led to the dissolution of the Biddle Society.

“If it weren’t for such devoted people as Professor Biddle and Jane Hathaway,” there wouldn’t be any condors left here,” said state senator Diane Kong, frequently described as the legislature’s leading condor advocate. ‘That woman was amazing. She should have been a professional lobbyist.”

“She was the nicest and most helpful person I met in California,” Clampett said from his retirement home in Tennessee. I would have never known what that man [Drysdale] was doing to me if it hadn’t been for her and she stopped things before I was wiped out.”

Services are pending. Golden West Funeral Home in Beverly Hills is handling the arrangements.

Another look at that "natural born" thing again

I have been reading the Constitution of the United States of America since at least when I was in junior high school. I read MacBeth in high school and that was almost as long ago. I imagine that most of the writers of the Constitution had read Shakespeare’s story of the ambitious Scottish king whose story the play purports to tell.

I don’t know why I did not notice until this week an obvious possible constitutional conflict for some people who might wish to be our nation’s head of state.

Our constitution specifically mentions that the president be a “natural born citizen.” The crazy rightists who complain about Obama’s missing birth certificate won’t quit their railing about the president’s alleged foreign birth and the governmental officials in Hawaii who back in 1961 rigged the record so that a baby of mixed-race history could run for president when he grew up.

I don’t participate in that view of conspiracy. But just this week those words “natural born” have just hit me with a different light.

I am advancing the hypothesis that this rules out any person, male or female of any race or birthplace, who was born by Caesarian section.

But MacBeth made it clear that people exposed to British culture [such as the one we were seeking to replace here] knew the distinction between being born of woman and being plucked out of same.

I don’t know my history well enough to know if any of our previous presidents were born that way or not and question whether anybody would be able to document anybody’s status this way, certainly not without infringing upon somebody’s medical records, but this ought to give conspiracy people of another age something to work with.