Bryce Zabel's FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH

Obama's Main Competition

In less than a month now, President Barack Obama will stand before a crowd in Washington, D.C. and take the oath of office. We already know that this will be historic simply from the point-of-view of Obama's background and race. The other competition, however, is performance. We know he's a great orator and people will expect a barn-burner of an inspirational speech. He won't have any problem eclipsing others that went before him like George W. Bush, Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon or even Bill Clinton. No, the man Obama has to stand up to by way of historical comparison is President John Kennedy.

48 years ago, the inaugural was similarly a piece of history. Not only was it jeopardized by bad weather, but it brought generational change to the White House. It was at that tiime that newly elected President John Kennedy spoke those words we still remember.

"Ask not what your country can do for you..." We've heard this so many times, we can finish JFK's words in our sleep. That speech, delivered on a brutally cold January day in 1961 where a blizzard threatened to shut down the entire affair, still goes down as the best inauguration speech, probably ever, certainly of the 20th century.

This is actually my favorite newsmagazine cover -- the day that John F. Kennedy assumed the presidency. It's a color photograph that Time's editors had decided two weeks earlier should be taken at the precise moment when he raised his right hand and took the oath as the nation's 35th President. Just possibly this was the last inauguration where Americans were absolutely filled to the brim with the possibilities that life would be getting much, much better.

Time -- with coverage coming from 17 correspondents -- led with the speech itself -- definitely getting right that it would become the classic speech, the one by which all others have been measured.

A blizzard threatened to turn the whole momentous occasion into a farce -- but President John Kennedy, delivering his inaugural address, more than saved the day. Kennedy's inauguration speech went beyond mere rhetoric derived from the U.S. past; it has profound meaning for the U.S. future. In lean, lucid phrases the nation's new President pledged to the U.S. to remain faithful to its friends, firm against its enemies but always willing to bring an end to the cold war impasse.

Sometimes, like the JFK coverage, they got the story just right. That's the fun of the Instant History blog. There will be other times where the writing of the moment was swayed by being too inside the story to see clearly. And there will be other times still where you will see that issues of political correctness and other bias have twisted the honest reporting of the moment into something that the original journalists would never agree with.

Reaction to the speech was immediate. From all shades of political outlook, from people who had voted for Kennedy in November and people who had voted against him, came a surge of praise and congratulation. Even so partisan a Republican as Senate Minority Leader Everett McKinley Dirksen described it as "inspiring" and as "a very compact message of hope."

The Time reporters here got the speech just right. Who knew when President Kennedy delivered that address that he and his presidency would end in such a tragic manner that it would affect Americans' sense of trust in their own government and that, as the years passed, he would be revealed to have had such huge personal flaws in terms of his risk-taking behavior?

One thing that impressed me in re-reading this article was how close we came to never hearing that speech delivered in the stirring way it was given. Snow had started to fall the night before and kept falling.

By nightfall on inaugural eve, confusion was complete. At least 10,000 cars were stalled and abandoned. Airplanes stacked up over the airport, then flew away; Herbert Hoover, winging up from Miami, had to turn back, never got to the inaugural. It took Pat Nixon 2 1/2 hours to get from her Wesley Heights home to the Senate Office Building, where her husband was holding a farewell party for his staff. . . At the White House, 30 members of President Eisenhower's staff were snowbound for the night. Determined partygoers struggled through the storm, some of the men in white ties and parkas, some of the women wearing leotards under their gowns.

Eventually, though, on that terribly cold day, the story was all about hope... a time when a leader could challenge us to "...ask what you can do for your country" without getting in a big political debate.

Who knows what Obama will ask of his listeners this time around? We'll know soon enough.

Mr. Obama Goes to Washington

EDITOR'S NOTE, ELECTION DAY-AFTER 2008.

It feels like a movie, this rise of Barack Obama. 

Besides its compelling lead actor, this blockbuster has had plot twists, villains, conflict, a heroic journey, incredible stakes and a great ending.  These are all, as it is, also elements expected to be in any film or TV pitch I might make out here in Hollywood.  Dramatically speaking, this one has it all.

So far this year, I've voted for him twice, supported his campaign financially, gone to a rally, and even worked on "Ready to Believe," a professionally-produced song that's been well-received everywhere from YouTube to iTunes.  Mostly, though, I've followed the campaign like a member of an audience glued to an on-screen spectacle. 

President-elect Barack Obama's journey has felt like an epic film, but the way it's sucked us into caring about a character in a show where anything can happen, it's really played more like a TV series.  But there hasn't been a reality show created that could match this one.

No matter who you voted for yesterday, a President Barack Obama promises to continue as a compelling chapter in American history. 

I was born on the exact day the Supreme Court issued Brown -vs- the Board of Education.  My father taught American history and was shamed by having to explain our country's shortcomings in civil rights.  As a kid, I actually remember seeing news coverage of people having dogs and water hoses set on them because they wanted basic dignity.  To see this change in my lifetime -- from the awful images from the south to this man of progress chosen to lead us -- is a profound thing. 

There's so much hard work ahead, but right now a black man just proved that anybody CAN grow up to be president.  That's good for our country and it's good for our citizens, especially our kids.  And, coming back from Europe just two days ago, I believe the support Obama receives from world leaders will help with leading on the global financial mess and getting them to kick in more troops in Afghanistan.

You see: the Barack Obama movie not only has done incredible domestic box office, but it's about to play just as successfully in global markets.

The United States of America, for a few years anyway, has a brand to equal Coke and McDonald's on the world stage.  The President of the United States of America, Barack Obama.

In the fall of 2007, before the first primaries, I first wrote about Barack Obama on the FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH blog.  I just re-read it today and thought it was worth the re-post.  Here it is then, as it was:

The world has probably not been holding its collective breath waiting to find out who the FWIW blog will throw its weight behind in the presidential campaign. We have yet to serve our billionth daily reader, Tim Russert stubbornly refuses to quote us on "Meet the Press," and the campaigns have apparently missed the opportunity to bookmark us on their browsers. Even so, I've been watching the presidential campaign from the sidelines long-enough, and it seems like the right time to get in the game.

I just logged on to the official campaign website and gave a donation to Barack Obama. There are some good candidates I can support if Obama does not get the Democratic nomination but he's my first choice by a mile.

I just can't get behind a George H.W. Bush - Bill Clinton - George W. Bush - Hillary Clinton narrative for America. We try to raise kids to believe that anyone can grow up to be president, and that sends the message that the truth is something else. I just don't buy the "experience" argument anyway. I'm looking for good judgment, character and the ability to make effective decisions by listening to people with different viewpoints and then doing what you think is best, often before all the facts can be known. I'm looking for someone who can then explain those decisions to us in a way that increases our solidarity as a country and not put more distance between us.

President Barack Obama will send a message to the world that America is a new, more hopeful place. It will send a message to Americans that the racial divisions which have plagued our country can begin to truly heal. Hopefully, by being on the ticket, even the election can be about something besides red state-blue state distrust and acrimony. We need a clean break from the past.

The election of Obama, however, won't simply be a message. He's a bright thinker and he brings people together. We've been looking for someone to embody the spirit of John Kennedy for as long as I've been an adult. That's Barack Obama. There is no other candidate in this race for whom that comparison is even possible.

Like John Kennedy having to deal with issues like missiles in Cuba, history won't let Obama simply be the man who opposed the use of force in Iraq but will throw other challenges at him. He will have his own thorny issues to deal with, notably Islamic extremism directed at the U.S., but there will probably be a few we don't even see coming now. From what I can see, he'll be a cool head in the White House and I trust him to make the call for me.

I hope his journey across America during this campaign will allow him to transcend the boxes people want to put him in, and allow him to grow into a leader who will represent all of us.

Anyway, we all know this campaign can't be about who's got the best collection of issue statements and legislative agendas and plans. For me, it's about - "Who do you trust?"

I trust Barack Obama and, for what it's worth, I'd ask you to consider doing the same. Thanks.

FINAL NOTE:  "Ready to Believe" is the title of the rock-anthem I co-wrote the lyrics to that was recorded by LA alt.rocker Cherish Alexander and released a few days before the California primary (while I was on strike for the WGA, no less).  This song has been well-received everywhere from YouTube where it's had over 100,000 plays to iTunes where you can get a quality MP3 of it.  But, because you read to the end of this, you can also get a free copy by clicking here.

Movie Smackdown Comix presents... THE 9/11 FILMS

Two films about 9/11 were released in 2006 on the eve of the fifth anniversary of the terrorist attack.

To read the full review, go to United 93 -vs- World Trade Center.  A reader's poll has just gone up, too, so please do express your own opinion.

MOVIE SMACKDOWN! - Two Reviews... One Film... No Holds Barred!

Review and Comix by Bryce Zabel.

Speed Kills: The Role of a (Short) Lifetime

Without Limits (1998) -vs- Prefontaine (1997)

The Smackdown. With the U.S. Olympic Team Trials in Track & Field coming up in Eugene, more than a few people will be thinking about the runner who pretty much owned Hayward Field back in the day, Steve Prefontaine.  It's been a decade since Hollywood made two films back-to-back about the legendary distance runner, and you may be tempted to go rent one of them to see for yourself what the fuss was all about.

Track's been on my mind for other reasons, too.  My wife and I have a film that just finished filming in Los Angeles last Friday, "Miles from Nowhere," about a high-school athlete who decides to go for a sub-four minute mile.  During the time we were polishing up our screenplay's last draft before production, we looked for a little inspiration and watched both "Prefontaine" and "Without Limits" within a couple of days of each other. It was like a film school assignment to see what different production teams and actors could do with essentially the same source material. But there was another element here, for me, that put even this challenge through a separate creative filter.

Steve Prefontaine wasn't actually a legend to me, you see, because I was there when he was breaking all these incredible records.

As a native Oregonian I had seen him win the state high school two-mile in a barn-burning race when I was just a kid, then I had gone to the University of Oregon at the same time he attended and ran, and was working at a local TV station as an intern at the time of his death. Later, I used to log a lot of miles running on the wood-chip trail dedicated to him, "Pre's Trail." I can't claim that I knew him, but I saw him on campus (vividly remember watching him chug some beer at Duffy's Tavern) and when he ran at Hayward field during my freshman year, my dorm (Douglass-Walton) faced the track and we literally watched and cheered from our room window.

I don't imagine too many people are ever going to watch both of these films so our Smackdown answers a practical question: if you want to see one single film that captures the essence of Steve Prefontaine, which one should you see?

Sex, Lie & Politics: Thomas v. Hill Redux

Just this month, the autobiography of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, My Grandfather's Son, was published and set off a new round of "He Said, She Said" in the media. In the book, Thomas gives his side of the nomination hearings of 1991 which, of course, led to a rebuttal by Anita Hill in the Op-Ed page of the New York Times ("The Smear This Time") and on and on.

Discriminating readers and historians have ample evidence on both sides of the story to decide who they want to believe. In that respect, nothing at all has changed in the 16 years since October of 1991 when America had a normally not-so-compelling Supreme Court nomination hearing process hijacked into something that felt like it came out of the tabloids.

If you think the current nomination and confirmation process surrounding Supreme Court nominees was rough during the last few years, just remember that it's almost impossible for it to get as awful as the Clarence Thomas hearings. We will probably never see anything quite like this again.

Although it's more on the level of the O.J. Verdict and not JFK's murder or 9/11, for those who lived through it, the Thomas Hearings still have a "where were you?" quality to them. Where were you when Anita Hill went before the Senate Judiciary Committee and publicly claimed that Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas had compared the length of his penis to an actor in a pornographic film by the name of Long Dong Silver? I was in a hotel room in Hawaii -- there to research an NBC pilot I was writing -- and even though I was surrounded by paradise I spent two days glued to a TV set.

Time devoted a great deal of space to this controversy in its October 21, 1991 issue, starting with an opening essay titled, "An Ugly Circus" and moving into the main article, "She Said, He Said."

It was clear that the differences in the Hill and Thomas versions on what transpired a decade ago were not a simple matter of differing sensibilities -- oversqueamishness on her part vs. bad taste on his. If Hill's description of Thomas' words and actions was truthful, then the Supreme Court nominee was guilty of sexual harassment in the past and perjury in the present. If Hill's account was a flight of fantasy, then she was delusional and a candidate for medical attention.

Notice on the cover that Time sub-titled the issue: "America's watershed debate on sexual harassment." That's my main nitpick on this issue. If both parties had agreed on what was said and done but disagreed on whether or not it was sexual harassment, well, then we could have had a watershed debate. This wasn't a debate on the issue of sexual harassment. It was a public spectacle where two incredibly bright, articulate and seemingly honest people told starkly different stories. One of them was a complete liar of epic proportion and the other wasn't. Today, 14 years later, we still do not definitively know the answer.

Cool and unflappable, Hill looked the Senators in the eye and handled every question without hesitation...No less poignant, searing or believable, however, were Thomas' anguished statements and adamant denials.

The hearings gave up lots of memorable moments. One of the "oddest episodes", according to Hill, involved an exchange in Thomas' office when he reached for a can of Coke and asked, "Who has put pubic hair on my Coke?" After Hill's testimony about this and numerous other incidents which included descriptions of Thomas discussing porno with women with large breasts engaged in a variety of sex acts with animals, Thomas came out swinging, calling the hearing "a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks." The article concluded:

...everyone who had witnessed Hill's and Thomas' dramatic testimony knew for certain only what they had known at the start: one was telling the truth, and the other was lying. There was no way to imagine a happy ending to this very sad confrontation. For both Hill and Thomas, it was the hardest ordeal of their lives. But one of them was shouldering the burden unfairly -- and it may never be known which one. While both had been sullied and injured by the proceedings, only one had been dragged through the mud on the strength of a very convincing lie.

So, who was telling the truth? Thomas had more to gain by lying -- a Supreme Court seat. But he also had excellent witnesses from his previous staffs who had worked with both of them saying that such behavior was never seen by them and would have been totally out of character. And it did appear that Hill initially thought her testimony to the FBI would be sufficient to derail his nomination without her having to speak to the committee. No one has definitively answered this question.

What do I think? First and foremost, I think that if Thomas did those things to Anita Hill then he's an asshole of extreme proportions (and I'm not talking about his Long Dong Silver either). And I also think that if it could be proved, even today, then he should be impeached and thrown off the court. But as I've pointed out earlier, this case isn't about sexual harassment, at least not until you can tell who's telling the truth.

I watched all the testimony on TV and whenever either Hill or Thomas was speaking, I believed them and knew the other was lying. It was maddening then, and it's maddening now. They were both brilliant witnesses. If I absolutely had to choose, I would take Thomas' denial to be the truth, but only by a very, very slim margin. Here's why. A tiny voice tells me that -- knowing know how high the stakes are over these nominations and how Democratic activists believe now (and believed then) that a woman's right to choose is literally at stake -- well, that voice tells me that it's possible Anita Hill was recruited to derail Clarence Thomas, things got out of hand, and she was basically told by a lawyer that she could either stick by her story or go to jail for perjury. But I wish I knew with more certainty...

State your own opinion in the comments. Who's the scummy liar and who's the victim? Tell it the way you feel it. And please visit Instant History by clicking on the logo below to go to www.instanthistory.net. Thanks!

Try to Remember (That Kind of September)

It's Tuesday, September 11th again. This is the first anniversary of that day that has fallen, like the original, on a Tuesday. So, let's take a moment and remember that 2,974 died that day. Let's never forget them or the families and friends who have felt their loss every day since.

So much has happened since that awful September morning, but those images are seared into our brains. I had saved these into my computer back then and they rock me back on my heels as much today as then, maybe even more so.

Where were you? Do you remember how you felt? I think this is the ultimate "where were you day?" There are only a few others that get close: JFK's assassination for my generation, Pearl Harbor for my parents. In the positive memory category, there's the Moon Landing. Somewhere below all of these -- because they were less universal -- you have the O.J. verdict and the John Lennon murder.

I was on a morning walk/jog with my friend Zach. We go out early, around 6:00a, P.S.T. I remember when we started that Zach has driven to my place that day and he'd just heard something on the news about a plane hitting the World Trade Center. But what he'd heard was that it was a light plane, some kind of macabre accident. We shrugged it off and headed out.

About forty minutes later, we were on our way up the hill that leads to my house and my wife raced our car up. She said that a second plane had hit the World Trade Center, that it was a big one. She usually doesn't give orders. This time she said, "Get in the car." We did.

Watching the news was awful. When somebody mentioned that people were jumping out of the Towers it seemed impossible. I remember literally shivering at that news. Jumping out of the World Trade Center! Jesus...

I simply was not prepared when the first Tower went down. Buildings don't fall down unless we dynamite them. This was impossible. Seeing the people running, covered in the white dust. It wasn't long before the second one came down. It felt like Armageddon. A memory that strikes me as completely odd and inappropriate now is that the school which our kids attended did not cancel classes but still asked that the kids come in. So we got our kids in, they watched TV in the classrooms until the first tower fell down and then we just went and got them and brought them home. Then we all watched TV together. My kids were pretty young and I don't think they quite got it or, if they did, they didn't want to think about it. I remember them giving my wife and me grief about "obsessing" about it. Even today, they don't seem disposed to talk at length about it.

I'll just say this straight out. When I saw what had happened, I didn't for a second think it was anything except something that had been masterminded by Islamic terrorists. I just knew. It was obvious. I also knew we were at war.

Nobody had to tell me this was like Pearl Harbor. We knew. But it was worse. It was on American soil and it was aimed specifically against innocent civilians.

Then the Pentagon got hit, too. And there was the news about United 93. When it crashed, my mind told me that we'd had to shoot it down. The true story of the heroism of the passengers wasn't obvious right away.

It was a terrible, awful, unforgettable day. Americans may disagree on the best method for fighting terrorism, but make no mistake we have to fight it. The kind of people who did this haven't given up. They're planning the next one, and they want it to be even bigger and bloodier. Just listen to what Osama (or Usama) has to say in his latest video postcard. Given the scope of 9/11, you can only imagine the nightmare that he and his ilk are contemplating. It's a hard thing to accept but there are people in the world who simply want to see you and your family dead.

Please leave your own memories in the comment section. It's all way too important to forget and, with five years, maybe you have a different perspective now than you did then.

I'm really tired of the partisan bickering that defines the aftermath of this sad event, but for one day, can we all just remember this reality?

2,973 died. Let's never forget that.

{PHOTOS: I saved these at 9/11 and I don't remember where they came from. If anyone knows, please let me know so I can give proper credit to the photographer or news organization.}

For a Movie Smackdown review of "World Trade Center" versus "United 93," please CLICK HERE.

Morning Wake-Up Call

Last night, about an hour after I got to sleep, a magnitude 4.5 temblor hit. I know people think we're all matter-of-fact about these things out here in Los Angeles, but I don't think it's true.

This one struck just before 1 a.m. about 4 miles northwest of Chatsworth, which isn't all that far from where I live. It hit with a real jolt and it went on long enough that I was wide-awake and planning where to hide when it subsided.

The thing is that you never know if it's going to be a little shaking or whether it's just the beginning of the "Big One." I was living in this same house back in 1994 for the Northridge quake and it was pretty insane. It literally turned on my stereo (which was turned off) at extremely loud volume for about four seconds. So I woke up then shaking to loud rock-and-roll. We all went outside into the cul-de-sac and worried with the neighbors, got out the flashlights and went looking to make sure everybody was accounted for. It was pretty scary, not something you'll ever take lightly.

Anyway, this recent one went away before it got serious. I checked my son's room and found out he slept through it. My daughter was out, we tried calling but it didn't immediately go through. But she was back home in a few minutes to check on us.

Then we all went back to sleep.

A "Wonder Years" Story About the Arctic Circle Drive-In, Neal Armstrong and a Guy Named Harvey

A few news organizations may note that today marks the anniversary of Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin's moonwalk on July 20, 1969. Since it's only the 38th anniversary, though, most will let it slide and we won't get the big "special" coverage for two more years on the 40th anniversary.

Even so, July 20 is an important day in my life but not solely for the awe and accomplishment of the technological and spiritual acheivement of the moon landing, but the personal impact it had on my young life. Years later, it was on a July 20 back in 2001 that my father passed away. Both of those events are related in my own memories, making this day always stand out to me.

Let's go back nearly four decades. It was 38-years-ago that Neil Armstrong made that little jump off the ladder from the lunar lander: "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind."  And it was also 38-years-ago that I was fired from my first job.

Back then, I was the youngest fry-cook in Hillsboro, Oregon, having scammed my way into a job at the Arctic Circle Drive-In before I was strictly employment legal, I think, based on the fact that my older brother had paved the way. It was a sweet deal -- I was making a full $1.35 an hour, up from my starting wage of $1.10 a year before. Do the math, that added up to a whole $10.80 a day and, if overtime was involved, man, that was serious bread. Of course, those burgers only cost nineteen cents, a quarter for a cheeseburger.

The boss was a tough immigrant -- a Basque from Spain -- named Mariano Bilbao and he was living (or working) the American dream.  Work, work, work and, if you did that, life would be easier for your kids.  His kid was just a baby, and Mariano was in full pay-the-dues mode to get ahead in time for his kid to have the good life he dreamed of.

When the schedule for the week of July 20 got posted, I got a sinking feeling because I had the night shift and, if all went according to plan, Neil Armstrong was going to be moon-walking while I was slinging burgers.  At the time, I was very into the whole moon landing, even more (if possible) than the rest of the country.  Plus, I'd been raised in a house where my dad -- a strict father if ever there was one -- was also a strict American history teacher and history didn't get much bigger than this.

So I asked Mariano if I could trade shifts with someone?   No.  Maybe we could have a TV in the kitchen so we could watch with every other person within ten miles of a TV?  No.  A radio then, just to listen to hear in real time how it went?  No.

Resigned to missing it all, I accepted my fate, strapped on my apron, and went to work.  Being the boss, even Mariano was at home, of course, watching the moon-walk with his wife.  Back at the grill, I was going insane and about thirty minutes before Armstrong was scheduled to set foot on the lunar surface, I snapped.  I called my dad and told him I wanted to come home to see the moon walk.  Would he come pick me up?

There was a long pause.  If you remember Kevin's dad (Dan Lauria) from "Wonder Years," then you remember my dad, Harvey. That same gruff son-of-a-bitch exterior, always pissed off, never connecting with his kids. I waited on the other end of the phone, knowing that The Lecture was coming. About responsibility, about sticking with your decisions, about not screwing up.  Instead, he said, "You know you'll be fired?" 

I said I knew. I waited again. Surely The Lecture was coming now. Another beat. "I'll be right down."

So my Dad drove down to the Arctic Circle Drive-In on Baseline Street in a moment of high drama in my young life.  We went back home, gathered with the rest of the family around the TV set, held our breath with everyone else and watched Armstrong's ghostly image from the moon.  When it was over, dad said we had to go back to the restaurant and I had to face the music.  I had done the crime, now I had to do the time.  As I returned, it was clear that my co-workers had given me up to Mariano, who was there waiting for me and, man, was he pissed.  He was a short guy with a fiery temper and his face was as red as I'd ever seen it.

Mariano fired me that night, as predicted. My dad told him he was missing a great worker and he was a small-minded man to not understand the importance of what was happening, and how this event had changed the world for everyone. Even fry-cooks.

All I know is that my dad had never stood up for me quite like that before and never quite like that after. I remember July 20, 1969 as clearly today for turning in my greasy apron as I do for Armstrong and Aldrin doing the moonwalk. And I remember July 20 because it was also the day that my dad passed away back in 2001.

So -- that giant leap for mankind -- for me, it isn't about where I was when it happened -- but all about where I wasn't.

Time's New Man-of-the-Year: Still JFK After All These Years

Last month, President John F. Kennedy would have turned 90 years old, had he lived. Even so, JFK is enjoying a banner year of publicity, especially for a dead man.

This week, it's Time magazine joining the fray, giving Kennedy the cover ("What We Can Learn from JFK") and a whopping 18 full pages of print and photo space. He gets a mostly adoring view from the writers who call him "A Warrior for Peace" and an "Icon of American Elegance."

Time joins a veritable publishing bonanza trading on the fascination with JFK-ness. There's Vincent Bugliosi's Reclaiming History which argues the most sensational assassination story you can imagine: namely that Oswald, in fact, acted alone. This book is being made into an HBO mini-series by Tom Hanks & Co. Before Bugliosi, it was Salon's editor David Talbot's Brothers which argued that Bobby Kennedy intended to win the presidency first and then investigate for a conspiracy which he believed in. And, before that, it was E. Howard Hunt who, basically on his death-bed, claimed in American Spy that it was Lyndon Johnson who conspired to see Kennedy shot.

Maybe that's what makes Time so unique with its latest issue. The assassination only gets two pages. One is devoted to Bugliosi's Oswald-acted-alone case and the other to Talbot's Bobby-suspected-conspiracy case. Everything else dissects what made JFK such a great president.

In fact, he was. His speeches were perfect pitch in confronting the Soviet menace and the Cold War, telling the enemy that we would "bear any burden" to oppose tyranny but also extending the olive branch of peace if they wished to be our partners. He was inspirational in other areas from race relations to volunteerism. He literally was of the new generation. He gave Americans hope and he gave people from around the world reason to like Americans.

Amazingly, one of the associated Time articles called "The Swingingest President Ever" is not about the hundreds, if not thousands, of women besides Jackie Kennedy that JFK bedded. It is about his golf game. The closest the writers come to analyzing his personal fall from grace is this single passage from the cover story's introduction:

"In more recent years, he has suffered from a revisionist backlash, portrayed in books and the media as a decadent prince who put the nation at risk with is reckless personal behavior. Journalist Christopher Hitchens has gone so far as to dismiss him as a "vulgar hoodlum." While Kennedy's private life would certainly not pass today's public scrutiny, this pathological interpretation misses the essential story of his presidency."

At the risk of sounding like I'm full of "revisionist backlash," I'm not certain I fully agree.

First, however, as I've said many, many times, I loved JFK and his death made a mark on me like everyone else of my generation. Second, I'm a life-long Democrat.

Still, I'm not inclined to accept Time's analysis that all would have been wonderful if only he'd lived. He lived a life of lies from his medical condition to his now-legendary affairs. He tried to kill foreign leaders. He had friends in the mob who did him favors. And, at the time of his assassination, he was not as universally liked as he was when he became a martyr.

Co-author Harry Turtledove and I have worked through the "if Kennedy lived" scenario and come up with a fairly controversial new conclusion. If JFK survived Dallas, we believe the resulting investigation would have exposed in a very short period of time all the unsavory things that have instead taken over four decades to come out. The backwash would have crippled his presidency and his reputation would be quite different today. It's an alt-history book which we invite you to check out by clicking on the image below.

What Are The Chances?

I haven't been a subscriber to the Los Angeles Times for over five years now. I've found it easier to read on-line and, when I feel like it, I'll pick up a copy at the local Starbucks if I've got the time. Sometimes you just like the feel of a newspaper.

This morning around 6:15a, I went out front of my house to meet my running partner, Zach, and there was a plastic-bagged copy of the Los Angeles Times on my driveway. I have no idea why, after five years, I had one delivered to me. Maybe it was a mistake. Maybe it was some kind of promotion to lure back old subscribers.

So I opened it up while I was waiting and there, featured in full-color on the front page, is the picture you see here in this post. Here's that photo and caption as they appear in today's "Valley Edition" --

IN THE WAY: A Los Angeles police officer picks up KCBS cameraman Carl Stein to move him out of the way during the police sweep of MacArthur Park. Stein said he had been struck by a baton earlier.
Photo: Rick Loomis, Los Angeles Times

The thing is Carl Stein is a friend of mine, going back 25 years now. We met when my wife, Jackie, also worked at KCBS as a new writer/producer. Carl lives out near us, we work out at the same gym and we have even been in Weight Watchers together.

What are the chances that I get one paper delivered to my house in five years and that, on the day it happens, a friend of mine going back a quarter-of-a-century is on the front page?

It gets a little weirder. Six years ago yesterday, I was on the front page of the Los Angeles Times myself when I was the spokesman for the Writers Guild of America during their contract negotiations.

Welcome to the club, Carl. Something tells me the price of your membership was too high.