A while back, I mentioned that after watching the HBO documentary on Albert Brooks, I decided to start posting some of my favorite of his comedy bit, mostly his inspired, lunatic appearances on The Tonight Show.  As they mention in the documentary, he never used material from his act but always came up with new material for the performance.  And they are just classic gems.

This is yet another.  I'll just say that's it's about him admitting to the audience up front that he has run out of material.  And in as Albert Brooksian way as imaginable, he takes "I have nothing" and builds it into lunacy.

The sound is a little muffled, but easy enough to understand.

Tomorrow is the vice-presidential debate between Tim Walz and "JD Vance".  There’s something I want to get to about it, but first there’s some business to get out of the way.
 
Leading into the debate, Gov. Walz has said that he gets nervous at such things.  What he explained is that from his background as a teacher, debates are an entirely different dynamic. “We are trained to answer the question, and we train our students to answer the questions," he said.  But on the debate stage, "That’s not how this goes.” 
 
To be clear, this is not a case of him lowering expectations. In fact, when he had his interview with Kamala Harris to be her running mate, he told the Vice President up front the same thing, that he is not a good debater. 
 
From things he has said, however, what Walz appears most worried about is not that he doesn’t have the issues down, or that he’ll go into the debate unprepared (anyone who’s seem him interviewed on TV or speaking at rallies knows full well that Tim Walz knows the issues insightfully), but rather that he’s concerned he won’t make his case as well as he wants to, and he doesn’t want to let Kamala Harris down.
 
His fellow-Minnesotan, Sen. Amy Klobuchar has a different view of Walz, though, while understanding his perspective.  She’s known Tim Walz for 18 years, when both were first elected to Congress and notes that contrary to Walz’s own concerns, “He’s a strong person. He’s just not a lawyer-debater type. It’s not like he was dreaming of debates when he was in first grade.”  She adds, as well that, knowing Walz as long as she has, she has full confidence in what she calls “his vision.”
 
Is it ideal for a candidate to say he’s not a good debater when going into a debate?  Not at all.  And taking him at his word, he probably isn’t a good debater.  But he’s good enough to have won election to Congress five times in a purple district that historically has gone Republican.  And good enough to have been elected governor of Minnesota five times.  So, whatever his deficiencies as a debater, he clearly knows his issues, has issues people support, and gets it all across in a way people like.  I’m not sure if “JD Vance” passes the test of the latter two of those categories.  All the more so because of all four candidates, polls show him at the bottom in “favorability."  (Fun fact:  Tim Walz is ranked first.)
 
Speaking of which, I’ve read an interview with MAGOP Rep. Tom Emmer who is doing debate prep with “JD Vance,” and says he’s gone through all of Tim Walz’s debates and knows his weaknesses, and they will hold him accountable for not being who he says he is.
 
That pretty much means three things. 
 
One, that Tim Walz told a false story 18 years ago about a drunk driving arrest three decades ago.  However, given that Walz was not charged with a DUI, and has said in the almost-20 years since he has given up drinking and that Diet Mountain Dew has become his go-to beverage, and has publicly acknowledged his mistakes because “You have responsibilities to others”, this seems a pretty empty issue at this long-past point – all the more considering that “Vance’s” running mate at the top of the ticket has been convicted of 34 felonies, been found liable of rape, and been found guilty of fraud – and takes no responsibility while blaming the court system and victim.
 
Two, the claim that Tim Walz supposedly lied about when he was stationed in Europe during Operation Enduring Freedom.  This is even an emptier issue, not only because he didn’t lie, but at worst explained poorly his actions, but mostly (and agreed by everyone) because he did, in fact, serve in Europe during Operation Enduring Freedom and did serve in the military for 24 years – when most people who are not career military leave after 10.  And it’s all the worse an issue for “Vance,” considering that it draws bright attention to the reality that his own running mate got three bogus deferments for non-existent “bone spurs” to keep him from being drafted.  And also, even more, “Vance” tried to make an issue of this already, and it went nowhere.
 
And third, what Tom Emmer and “JD Vance” consider Tim Walz’s weaknesses for which he must be held accountable are most likely policies that Walz passed as law when Minnesota governor, like free lunches for school kids.  I have a pretty good sense that not only can Gov. Walz fully defend those really well, but the policies probably sound very good to voters.  Just not to “JD Vance,” Tom Emmer and MAGOPs.
 
Further, and importantly, for “JD Vance” to try to hold anyone “accountable” for not being who they are is almost comically ludicrous, considering that he was born James Donald Bowman, changed his name to James David Hamel, changed again to James David Vance, then J.D. Vance, then JD Vance.  And was born and raised in a suburb of Cincinnati, not Appalachia, insisting to be a “hillbilly.”
 
More on “Vance” wanting to hold anyone accountable for not being who they claim to be in a moment, but finally it must be added that while Tom Emmer is swaggering around that he helped with debate prep for “JD Vance,” know that – not shockingly – Tim Walz, like all candidates (except Trump) is doing debate prep, as well, and he’s been doing it with Pete Buttigieg sitting in as “’JD Vance’”.
 
Which not only brings us back to the “JD Vance” trying to slam others for not being who they say they are – but also the main point here that I wanted to bring up:
 
For all the substantive and non-substantive issues that will be discussed at the debate – and I even include racist, hate-filled lying about making up stories on Haitians in Springfield Ohio, supposedly eating pet dogs and cats, and his comments about post-menopausal women and single cat-ladies -- there is one thing far-above  all that I dearly hope gets brought up, whether by the moderator or by Tim Walz.  I’m sure it will be brought up, but what I most hope is that it deserves to be drilled very deep.  And that’s “JD Vance” calling Trump “American’s Hitler.”  Not to mention all the other things he said disparaging about Trump -- like how he’s a “Never Trumper,” how he really hates Trump and would never support him, how Trump is "reprehensible" and "cultural heroin," and now, too, what’s just been uncovered in very recent text messages from 2020 after Trump left office, when "JD Vance" was a sitting senator, writing that "Trump has just so thoroughly failed to deliver on his economic populism.”  But mainly, above all, I want to see focus on “JD Vance” calling Trump “American’s Hitler.” 
 
I say this for one specific reason.  All the other things can be brushed off as “I changed my mind after seeing Trump in action.”   (Well, all except the one written after Trump left office...)  I’m not saying that doing so is remotely believable or honest, because it’s not.  Especially his recent slamming Trump on not accomplishing his economic promises.  But you can say all that with a straight face and know you probably won’t go to hell.  But saying, as “JD Vance” has, that he changed his views about Trump being “America’s Hitler” after seeing him in action??  That’s something else entirely.  And that’s when Tim Walz should say something along the lines of --
 
“How in the world do you change your view about someone after calling them ‘America’s Hitler’???  What in the world changed??  When you call someone “America’s Hitler,” that has to be for a reason.  And for a very horrific reason.  Because Adolf Hitler is not only considered the most evil person of the last 100 years, but among the worst human beings in history, if not the worst.  Someone who built concentration camps to gas and exterminate 6 million Jews in a plan to wipe out every Jew on earth, and rounded up and murdered others he considered enemies of Germany: homosexuals, people with disabilities, Gypsies, Jehovah’s Witnesses and more.  Eradicate them all.  Someone who put together an army to literally take over the world and have the Third Reich rule it for over a thousand years. How do you go from calling Trump ‘America’s that’ – America’s Hitler – and then suddenly change your opinion and think, ‘Well, gee, he’s not so bad after all.  I want to be his running mate’??!  What changed??!!  What changed your mind??  You said you thought he was ‘America’s Hitler’.  – ‘America’s Hitler’!!!!!  Why?  What made you think that?!!  What in Trump suddenly changed to make you not think that anymore.  I’m sorry, but it’s not enough to say, ‘I thought that Trump was America’s Hitler, but I don’t anymore.  I saw he was better.’  Better??  A ‘better Adolf Hitler’ is still Adolf Hitler!!  You have to explain – specifically – in God’s name, why did you change????  You have to explain specifically how you thought that Donald J. Trump was ‘America’s Hitler’ and then the one day, you don’t!  Why?  How?  How does America’s Hitler go from being America’s Hitler, to…he’s okay, I want to be his running mate!!’”????!!!!!

And yes, I know, Tim Walz is not going to say all this at the debate.  But a guy can dream.

Actually, going even further, what I would personally most love is to see Gov. Walz make this his only point for almost the entire evening, pounding this one thing over and over and over.  The only shift is that I'd just reserve at least some time for, well... y'know, the whole "making up stories about immigrants supposedly eating pet dogs and cats and ducks, post-menopausal women and single cat-ladies" things,  That, and ordering "whatever works" doughnuts.

But mostly, exactly how did you get from "America's Hitler" to wanting to be his running mate?
​

​On this week’s ‘Not My Job’ segment of the NPR quiz show Wait, Wait…Don’t Tell Me!, the guest contestant is Oscar-winner Gary Oldman.  His conversation with host Peter Sagal (and the panelists jumping in a lot) is not substantive at all, nor high-end as you might expect from NPR – but it’s filled with laughter as they focus on the character Oldman plays, ‘Jackson Lamb,’ in the acclaimed spy series, Slow Horses, and particularly Lamb’s predilection for flatulence.
 
This is the full Wait, Wait… broadcast, but you can jump directly to the “Not My Job” segment, it starts just before the 18:00 mark.

On this “The Weekly Show” podcast with Jon Stewart, they write that “Jon sits down with the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, to explore the challenges the U.S. and U.K. face during their differing election cycles. From immigration to populism to social media, they explore how crucial it is for our representatives to keep us informed without the interference of misinformation. In response to last week’s episode on the economy, Jon is joined by Economics Professor and author of The Deficit Myth, Stephanie Kelton, to tackle government spending and deficits”

​We have another new one this week.  The contestant is Eric Ebbenaga of New York City (though calling in from Nashville, Tennessee).  It’s a very florid piece, and the hidden song is well-hidden early, but eventually it kicked it pretty clearly I thought, and so I got it.  The composer style came down to two people for me, like for the contestant, as well, and – like the contestant, we guessed wrong between them.

​The guest on this week’s Al Franken podcast is Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias.  It's an extremely interesting and accessible conversation, going into areas we don't get to hear, of course, when Elias is interviewed for 5-10 minutes on television.

As Al writes, “Trump and the GOP are working harder to disenfranchise voters NOW than they were in 2020. They are no longer a majoritarian party and want to disrupt our electoral process as much as they can. How will we preserve the integrity of this election? What are some of the ways that Trump and GOP lawyers will attempt to derail the will of the people? Our friend and top Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias from Democracy Docket joins us to break down some of the ways that our democracy is under attack and what we can do to fight it."