Jimmy Fallon To Take Over Conan’s Show. Ratings Practice Diving Skills.


The Future Of An Ex-Host
The Future Of An Ex-Host

I don’t think I’m going out on a limb here by saying that Jimmy Fallon isn’t funny.  Girls like him because they think he’s dreamy, but he has never really earned the tag “funny”.  Well, in a move that shows this small detail is of little significance, Lorne Michaels dubbed him the successor to the throne of Conan O’Brien.  See, Conan will be taking over The Tonight Show when Leno retires (soon).  Fallon will then take over Late Night With Conan O’Brien.  No plans for changing the name have been mentioned.


Por que?  I, along with many other humans, like to preserve the humor now somewhat present in the selection of night show clowns.  By the way, isn’t it amazing that Letterman is still alive?  Anyway, Fallon will complete the Carson Daly-ing of Late Night.  We will now be subject to mild talent relying heavily on cue-cards to pull laughs to accent the canned tracks played on TV.  We will see how this pans out.  I have low expectations here, kids.  What do you think?

Here’s an article for some real journalism on the story (from E!):


Fallon Falls Into Late Night With Nightly Webcasts

By Gina Serpe Mon Jul 21, 7:22 AM PDT


Jimmy Fallon is going to log a little more time on NBC’s farm team, working under the hope that practice makes perfect for the Late Night host-in-waiting.


Lorne Michaels, the executive producer of the house that Conan O’Brien built, has revealed plans for his successor to hone his late-night shtick with five or six months’ worth of online webcasts prior to his TV debut in the post-Tonight Show slot.


The online shows will come in advance of Fallon’s spring 2009 takeover and, presumably, will help work out the kinks that, back when O’Brien first started out, nearly rendered the then-untested host DOA on the airwaves.


“Conan needed time to find his show,” Michaels said of the one-time David Letterman successor. “I think this will help Jimmy to do that.”


The five- to 10-minute webcasts, which will likely debut online, will “help define what the show looks like,” Michaels said, while allowing for more experimentation.


“It will let Jimmy do stuff you don’t normally find on television,” said Michaels, adding that the show won’t necessarily take advantage of the less policed medium. “I think we’re our own censors.”


Another benefit, planned or not, is that the show will allow Fallon a foothold into a younger demographic, something competitors Craig Ferguson and Jimmy Kimmel have been encroaching on with more persistence in recent months.


The webcasts will be daily, posted online at 12:30 a.m., in the five-minute window between the end of the Tonight Show and the beginning of Late Night, “so people will begin to look for Jimmy at that time,” Michaels said.


Although NBC’s website seems the natural place for such an endeavor, Michaels said he’s unsure where the segments will premiere.




Click here to see another side of this issue. It’s very super.


NakedEric Broke The John Edwards Love Child Story FIRST! (after The Enquirer)

Look it up!  I had the scoop on the Jon Edwards scandal a LONG time ago!  See, kids – Stick with nakedEric and I’ll keep you on top of things…

See for yourself – NakedEric Covers Edwards Love Child



This Cat Is No Pussy!
This Cat Is No Pussy!

Get Ready For Civil War II

 ::Command:: Step back and simply observe, or ponder, the staunch, passive-aggressive, ill-conceived, oft-erroneous, stands people are taking an issues these days.  This is quite an irony because this particular NOW coincides perfectly with the NOW that is rife with hordes of mis- or un- informed people willingly giving up freedom in the name of, HA HA FREEDOM!  Yes, we will not be known as the American Renaissance, kids.  I love America and am proud of my heritage.  This is an observation with no political bend.  So, let me just head that off right away.  I don’t want to be flooded with mail from the people I’m about to make fun of.  Yes, I do want to have my cake and eat it too!  Fine, write to me if you get mad.  But what I’m about to write here is super true.  Check it:

  I just came home from a bar.  As I was leaving, I somehow struck up a convo with a girl who was cleaning up.  She told me about her family heritage and said that she was Dominican.  I asked, as I always do in these types of exchanges, “Where were you born?”  She replied, “New York”.  I then observed the obvious, “So, you are American, right?”

“No, I told you, I’m Dominican!  What are you?”

“My mother is Italian and my father is a European mutt, but I am American.”

“No, you’re ITALIAN.   I never would have thought YOU were an ITALIAN.”

“I’m American.”, I tried again.

“No, you’re ITALIAN.  When is your birthday?”

“Ummm.  September.”

“Are you a VIRGO?  No way are you a VIRGO!”

“Well, yes actually I am”

“‘Cuz I am a Cancer and we are supposed to mingle well together!” 

“But you were born here, right?  Doesn’t that make you American?”

“I’m from The Dominican Republic, so I’m Dominican!”

  OK.  No sense moving ahead with this, at a BAR of all places.  So I silenced myself seeing I was getting nowhere and asked her age.  17.  I then commented to a friend, who was considering enlisting in the military, that I thought it was a great idea.  My new 17-year-old pundit/friend overheard me and said, “Oh, I would never join the military. This war is stupid and I hate George Bush!”  Yes, she actually said that.  All at once, too.  Feeling like I was just told to discuss the ethical violations of The Third Reich to a Jewish Temple, I was mystified with where to begin setting this girl straight.  Or, at least, letting her know that there are many flights back to the Dominican Republic on a daily basis.  Perhaps she should board one.  That is where she is from, after all…

  I simply asked, “Why do you hate the war?”

“War is always wrong.”

“Do you know why this one, in particular, is wrong?”

  She looked at me with utter disdain and said, “Oh no, are you one of those WAR people?”.  I replied that I did not know what that was.  Then she said, “Oh, and are you a BUSH-LOVER, too?  You can’t be a BUSH-LOVER!”  I definitely didn’t mean to get her started like this.  It was both childishly charming and pathetic while still making me a bit angry.  I simply did an ‘Ummmmm”

“You are?  I guess you’re a GUN PERSON too and a REPUBLICAN!  How can you be a REPUBLICAN?  I don’t understand…” (finally she said something that made sense, she didn’t understand much at all)

So let’s sum this up so far.  I will spare you the rest of this “conversation” because I believe that I have made my point clear.  Let’s review:

This 17-year-old Dominican girl (not American, of course) has me labeled as the following, after a 3-minute dialogue:







  This is a bit extreme, bit it is not unusual.  Our frustration with the state of the world has begat a broiling, simmering hatred for all that is not our own.  No opinions are acceptable unless they are our own, despite how little we know about issues on which we form an opinion.  This, alone, is not terribly unusual.  We live in a stressful time and we can get a bit clingy to our ideas, that’s okay.  What is not okay is the labeling of others.  These badges that I had earned in a passing conversation show how teenagers are growing up to view the world.  To them, freedom means to form a strong opinion on something you know virtually nothing about, and apply a “from my cold dead hands” mentality about sticking with it.

  Along with this terrible labeling disease is the will to give government a near God-like status where they will march in and cure all of our ills.  We are looking at the 2008 candidates with a hunger in our eyes that seems to say, “What have you done for me lately and what will you do for me if elected?”  This is not freedom, kids.  Actually, it’s quite the opposite.  Sadly, freedom means that sometimes we’re on our own to deal with the trials of life.  We can seek leadership from our elected officials.  However, they cannot, and should not tell us how to live our lives.  Nor should they have the power to heal or harm you directly.  Government can set the stage and equip us with education.  They can, in a sense, lead us to water.  We must take it upon ourselves whether we, how much we, and when we drink.  Freedom is not having water delivered and poured down our throats.  However, with the stark convenience of on-demand society, it seems that a rapidly growing number of people would like to surrender their freedom to be “taken care of” by our government.  Well, your movement lost, people.  It was called Communism and it lost because it sucks.  Look it up.  Freedom is wonderful and worthy of our curiosity not capitulation.  Freedom challenges us and makes us strong, independent people.  This is exactly what modern people seem to fear.  They seem to fear the hard road to self-empowerment that is the delicious fruit of freedom.  It is easier to remain ignorant and simply shut out dissenting opinions while letting the government take care of everything.

  Well, maybe it’s because I’m a VIRGO, or a GUN PERSON, but I love being and AMERICAN.  I love freedom and I love our tireless defense of it.  If you wish to remain ignorant, divisive, or refuse to embrace the term “American” and all that it represents, then I would be glad to direct you to the next flight leaving for the Dominican Republic.


I’ll Support A Cure For AIDS When You Support A Cure For Substance Abuse

Like most educated people, I know that equal isn’t always fair and to be fair is not always to be equal. So, with that in mind, I give voice to a growing concern I have and ask that you consider it before making an easy snap judgment.

AIDS is a terrible affliction. It is brutal and unfair. We should and do dedicate money and resources to bring about its annihilation. One who contracts HIV and, consequently, the AIDS virus is seen as a victim and is comforted by the support that is readily available to them. Fair. I am proud of this part of our culture.

Digging deeper I ask, “How does one contract this terrible disease?”. The most common ways you can catch HIV/AIDS are, to quote Wiki:

The most common way is thru sexual intercourse (oral, anal, and vaginal) however, u can catch it by intravenous drug use, blood transfusions, open wounds (anywhere where fluids can be exchanged)

So, we see that the top two ways of catching the disease are: 1) Unprotected sex & 2) Intravenous drug use. Hold that thought and keep in mind the empathy and support gushed upon AIDS patients.

Drug Addiction. ::crowd goes oooooh:: Dead rock stars, actors, and junkies. They had it coming and deserved it. They should have stopped using or never started. They made bad decisions and brought sickness upon themselves. I believe that this is a fair summation of the prevailing attitude towards drug users. Unlike HIV/AIDS there is no empathy, sympathy, or support for the disease of drug addiction. Yes kids, it is a disease. No addict enjoys using. This is the nature of addiction. It is a sickness acquired by either bad decisions or emotional problems such as Depression that do not respond to pharmaceuticals. Once addicted, the individual goes from mentally craving the “high” to physically needing the drug for basic sustenance.

The most common causes of drug addiction are: 1) Depression & 2) Substance Abuse

So, because of either a bad decision, or an untreated mental illness, an individual can become a drug addict.

Recently I watched the 79th All-Star Game at Yankee Stadium and heard the commentators tell and retell the story of how Josh Hamilton overcame drug addiction to reclaim his place in Major League Baseball. Every time, however, they clearly stated that Hamilton had missed three years of baseball and had almost died because of a sickness he “brought upon himself” or a lifestyle he “chose to live”. Is that so? Do you think that Hamilton wanted it this way? We’ll leave that as a rhetorical question as I ask a more poignant question. What if we prefaced those afflicted with AIDS the same way?

“He was an excellent student and had a bright future until he contracted HIV, a sickness he ‘brought on himself’.”

“There is a terrible AIDS epidemic in the inner city. Apparently this is a lifestyle more people ‘choose to live in South Chicago’.”

Never would you hear this because somewhere, sometime it was decided that using dirty needles and having unprotected sex was a sickness worthy of our deepest sympathies and deepest pockets. Similarly, it was decided that those trying to alleviate the terror of Depression or choosing to experiment with drugs almost deserved to become afflicted with Drug Addiction. There is no sympathy for Drug Addicts and this is because there is little understanding of the disease. Further, there is an incorrect stereotype and image of the “typical” drug addict that makes it impossible to garner support for these sick people. Thus, this sickness feeds on itself. Without a clear support channel, addicts often want to heal and overcome their affliction, but professionals from doctors to pharmacists make any help given magnanimous at best. The addict then relapses and falls deeper into despair knowing that the world is essentially against them and this monster that rules their existence is never going to be put down unless they tread this terror-laden road completely alone.

Josh Hamilton overcame his drug addiction. Why? Because he had, and still has, a companion who stands by his side and supports him. This prevents him from relapsing. To wit; Hamilton said, “Without his support I would never have gotten clean. I still need his help daily. I still don’t trust myself.” Seems that Hamilton is a pretty lucky guy. Most people are repulsed by drug addicts while they wear ribbons and hold fundraisers for AIDS victims. Remember the bulk of those falling victim to either affliction did so because of bad luck and/or poor decisions. Why do we then embrace those with AIDS and shun those with a drug addiction? It is a more pertinent question then you may believe, especially when you take in to account the story of Josh Hamilton and the success that he attributes to the intangible support of a beloved friend.

I asked before that you reserve judgment here and consider the case I am making. I know that I am being a bit hyperbolic with some of the argument, but you have to agree that it is worth some thought. Certainly I am not diminishing the tragedy of AIDS. I am only using it to shed light on the issue of drug addiction and the equal need for support with this disease.

If we continue to shun addicts and avoid the problem, it will get worse and many people will die. Now that we have the gateway drugs of Vicodin and Oxycontin being liberally prescribed by “health” professionals. Do you know that the makers of these drugs were found guilty of many high crimes recently for misrepresenting how addictive their “medicine” is. The result? They paid a stiff fine and the drugs remain on the market. Hmmmmm… Take a look at how many teens are dying from prescription medication. Then take a look at how many heroin addicts were led to this affliction by an opioid medication dispensed by their trusted doctor and local pharmacy. This is another issue and I am on a tangent, but it does deserve a mention here.

I ask that we begin changing our view of a drug addict and finding ways to support their desire to become clean. Like an AIDS victim, we must see drug addicts as sick people in need of care. If we do make this paradigm shift, we will stop this sickness before it inevitably becomes an epidemic and takes away the lives and contributions of more wonderful people. Everyone deserves another chance, despite the mistakes they have made. Nobody deserves to contract AIDS or a drug addiction. Both can be stopped with proper education and support. Let’s try harder to be fair…

Does The Rev. Jesse Jackson Want Rip Barack Obama’s Balls Off?

Reverends don’t say the “f” word. Nor do they openly support a public figure, then attack him when he, unknowingly, speaks his mind in a not-so-dead mic before an interview on health care. Both of those previous statements, apparently, are super false! Yeah! The Reverend did say these terrible things, according to FOX News. He even held a press conference to “clarify” his statements. I guess he thought “clarify” meant give an inane lecture apropos for History 101 which was cause for the requisite sleeping listeners. Amazing. He supports Obama in public, then curses him violently in private? Could Reverend Jackson be a…HYPOCRITE? Time will tell. Stay tuned.